Dissent

Jul 242014
 

Samuel Gibbs reports:

Google is being hauled in front of European data protection regulators on Thursday to explain its handling of the “right to be forgotten” ruling by the European Court of Justice (ECJ).

The ECJ ruling meant that EU citizens had the right to request that information online that is inaccurate, inadequate, irrelevant, or excessive be removed from search listings and other non-media websites.

Read more on The Guardian.

Jul 232014
 

Victoria Espinel of BSA/The Software Alliance writes about DOJ’s position that a warrant served on Microsoft requires it to produce all of the customer’s emails stored on Microsoft servers – even those outside the U.S.

… That astonishing overreach [by the government] is based on a legal fiction—that no search occurs until the digital data are transferred to the United States. But that is simply wrong as a technical matter, because the foreign server must be searched to identify the information at issue and to transfer it to the United States. And it is wrong as a legal matter as well: No one would argue that physical papers stored in Ireland, France or Hong Kong had not been “searched” if they were identified, bundled up and sent to the United States.

The government’s expansive argument also violates a second fundamental legal principle, known as “comity,” which requires U.S. courts to give appropriate respect to the laws and interests of other nations when addressing questions about the application of U.S. law abroad.

Read more on National Law Journal.

Jul 232014
 

Jack Bouboushian reports:

All the critical material in an 81-page 2011 FISC opinion on NSA surveillance has been declassified and made public, a federal judge ruled, rejecting the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s request for an unredacted copy.

In 2012, the EFF, a digital rights group, submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the National Security Agency seeking a copy of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court’s (FISC) October 2011 order related to the government’s collection of intelligence on foreign targets.

Read more on Courthouse News.

Jul 232014
 

Media companies expressed concern about the impact that proposed changes to EU data protection laws will have on the way they handle personal information at a recent industry debate hosted by ITN and the Media Society.

However, Information Commissioner Christopher Graham said that a current exemption to the application of some data protection rules that apply in the UK was “safe”, despite it not being explicitly provided for under the proposed EU General Data Protection Regulation, according to a report by Hold the Front Page.

Read more on Out-Law.com.

Jul 222014
 

Brendan Sasso reports:

The White House may have misled people who visited its website about how it tracked their online behavior.

In a forthcoming paper, a group of researchers write that thousands of top websites, including WhiteHouse.gov, have been using a new, persistent type of online tracking.

Justin Brookman, the director of consumer privacy at the Center for Democracy and Technology, said the tracking was “probably inconsistent” with the White House’s own website privacy policy.

Read more on NationalJournal.

Jul 222014
 

Ken Strutin writes:

Each generation transmits to posterity some part of its genetics, knowledge, and possessions. And to assure their integrity, the Constitution protects privacy of person, freedom of thought, and sanctity of property. So it is that an all embracing genetic confidentiality ought to occupy the guarded space between Fourth Amendment bodily privacy and Fifth Amendment self-incrimination.

Read more on New York Law Journal.