Author: rebecca

Redwood City, Calif. – On Thursday, February 18, at 9:00 a.m., the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) will urge a judge in Redwood City, California, to suppress evidence illegally gathered from an iPhone.

In People v. Taylor, police in Daly City, California, seized the suspect’s phone during his arrest. Hours later, investigators searched through the data on the device — including contacts, called phone numbers, emails, text messages, Internet search history, and photos — without a search warrant. Police later obtained a search warrant for the phone, based in part on information gathered during the initial illegal search.

In Thursday’s hearing, EFF Senior Staff Attorney Marcia Hofmann will ask the court to suppress the illegally gathered evidence and quash the warrant based on that improperly collected information.

For more information on attending the hearing, email [email protected].

WHAT:
People v. Taylor

WHEN:
Thursday, February 18, 2010
9:00 a.m.

WHERE:
Department 2A
San Mateo County Superior Court
400 County Center
Redwood City, CA 94063

For more on this case:
http://www.eff.org/cases/people-v-taylor

Contacts:

Marcia Hofmann
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
[email protected]

Jennifer Stisa Granick
Civil Liberties Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
[email protected]

San Francisco – The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), joined by a coalition of public interest, consumer, and library groups, urged a federal appeals court Thursday to preserve consumers’ rights and the first sale doctrine in a battle over an Internet auction of used computer software.

Timothy Vernor is an online software reseller who tried to auction four packages of Autodesk’s AutoCAD software on eBay. Autodesk threatened Mr. Vernor with a copyright lawsuit, claiming that its software is only “licensed,” never sold. With the assistance of the public interest litigators at Public Citizen, Vernor filed suit in Seattle against Autodesk, asking the court to clarify his right to resell the AutoCAD software packages. He prevailed before the district court in 2009, prompting Autodesk to appeal.

“For too long, software companies have tried to strip consumers of their rights as owners of software by pretending that all software is licensed, rather than sold,” said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Fred von Lohmann. “But if software companies can strip us of our rights with a license agreement, there’s nothing to stop book publishers, record labels, and movie studios from using the same trick to shut down libraries, archives, used bookstores, and online auctions. For more than a century, the first sale doctrine in copyright law has stood for the principle that if you bought it, you own it, and you can resell it or give it away.”

In an amicus curiae brief filed Thursday with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, EFF — joined by the Consumer Federation of America, the American Library Association, Association of Research Libraries, Association of College and Research Libraries, U.S. Public Interest Research Group, and Public Knowledge — argued that Autodesk cannot trump the first sale doctrine with a “license agreement” included with its software.

“What’s at stake in this case is the ability of consumers actually to own the things they pay for. We can’t let the fine print used by the copyright holder gain complete control over every aspect of a work’s use,” said Sherwin Siy, deputy legal director for Public Knowledge. “If that happens, then everything becomes a potential copyright infringement. The simple things we take for granted, like buying and selling used books or CDs, or even software, would disappear under the threat of massive fines or possible criminal charges.”

For the full amicus brief:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/vernor_v_autodes/VernorAmicus.pdf

Contact:

Fred von Lohmann
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
[email protected]

San Francisco – Today a federal appeals court rejected a government claim of “lobbyist privacy” to hide the identities of individuals who pressured Congress to grant immunity to telecommunications companies that participated in the government’s warrantless electronic surveillance of millions of ordinary Americans. As the court observed, “There is a clear public interest in public knowledge of the methods through which well-connected corporate lobbyists wield their influence.”

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has been seeking records detailing the telecoms’ campaign for retroactive legal immunity under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Telecom immunity was enacted as part of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008.

“Today’s ruling is an important one for government and corporate accountability,” said EFF Staff Attorney Marcia Hofmann. “The court recognized that paid lobbyists trying to influence the government to advance their clients’ interests can’t hide behind privacy claims to keep their efforts secret.”

This decision is the latest setback for the government in its long-running attempt to delay disclosure of the documents EFF seeks. So far, EFF has obtained thousands of pages of records through this litigation.

“AT&T, Verizon and Sprint expended millions of dollars to lobby the government and get an unconstitutional grant of retroactive immunity for their illegal spying on American citizens,” said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kurt Opsahl. “The public deserves to know how our rights were sold out by and for telecom lobbyists.”

The appeals court sent part of the case back down to the district court for further consideration, including whether disclosure of the lobbyists’ identities would reveal intelligence sources and methods and whether communications between the agencies and the White House can be withheld under the presidential communications privilege or other grounds.

For the full opinion:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/foia_C0705278/opinion2909.pdf

For more on this case:
http://www.eff.org/issues/foia/cases/C-07-05278

Contacts:

Marcia Hofmann
Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
[email protected]

Kurt Opsahl
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
[email protected]

Nate Cardozo
Open Government Legal Fellow
Electronic Frontier Foundation
[email protected]

UPDATE: The hearing has been moved to Friday, February 12, at 9:30am.

Philadelphia – The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) will be arguing this Friday before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit in Philadelphia, urging the court to block a government attempt to seize telephone company records detailing a cell phone user’s past locations without first getting a search warrant.

EFF is serving as a friend of the court or “amicus,” joined by co-amici the ACLU, the ACLU of Pennsylvania, and the Center for Democracy & Technology. Professor Susan Freiwald of the University of San Francisco, who submitted a separate amicus brief to the panel, will be joining EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston in arguing on Thursday that federal privacy statutes in combination with the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protect the privacy of cell phone users and require the government to show probable cause before obtaining cell phone location information.

WHAT:
Oral argument In the Matter of the Application of the United States of America for an Order Directing a Provider of Electronic Communication Service to Disclose Records to the Government

WHEN:
Friday, February 12th
9:30am

WHERE:
Albert Branson Maris Courtroom (19th floor)
U.S. Courthouse
601 Market St.
Philadelphia, PA 19106

For more information on attending Thursday’s hearing, contact [email protected].

For the full EFF amicus brief to the Third Circuit:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/celltracking/Filed%20Cell%20Tracking%2…

For more on the issue of cell phone tracking:
http://www.eff.org/issues/cell-tracking

Contacts:

Kevin Bankston
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
[email protected]

Jennifer Stisa Granick
Civil Liberties Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
[email protected]

Rebecca Jeschke
Media Relations Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
[email protected]

San Francisco – The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has won reexamination of an illegitimate patent on voice-over-Internet protocol (VoIP) that could cripple the adoption of new VoIP technologies.

A company named Acceris Communications Technologies, now C2 Communications Technologies, was awarded the bogus patent for hardware, software, and processes for implementing VoIP using analog telephones as endpoints — covering many telephone calls made over the Internet. EFF and the law firm Fenwick & West LLP filed a reexamination request showing that both a prior patent and published reference materials described the underlying technology long before Acceris made its claim. Today the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) granted EFF’s reexamination request, ruling that there were substantial new questions of patentability.

“Our American patent system is meant to encourage invention and innovation,” said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. “Undeserved patents instead serve to quash competition and hurt business and consumers.”

“We are pleased that the USPTO agrees with the substantial new questions of patentability raised in EFF’s request, and we look forward to the USPTO’s ultimate decision on this patent,” said Nikhil Iyengar of Fenwick &West.

The challenge to this patent is part of EFF’s Patent Busting Project, which combats the chilling effects of bad patents on the public and consumer interests. So far eight patents targeted by EFF have been busted, invalidated, narrowed, or had a reexamination granted by the Patent Office.

For more on EFF’s Patent Busting Project:
http://www.eff.org/patent/

Contacts:

Cindy Cohn
Legal Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
[email protected]

Nikhil Iyengar
Fenwick & West LLP
[email protected]

Berkeley, CA – On Thursday, January 28, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is hosting a day-long public roundtable in Berkeley, California, exploring the privacy challenges posted by new developments in technology. Three experts from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) are taking part.

Panels at Thursday’s roundtable include “Technology and Privacy,” where EFF Staff Technologist Peter Eckersley will discuss the arms race between tracking technologies and privacy-enhancing technologies. Also on the agenda is “Privacy Implications of Mobile Computing” with EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston addressing privacy issues of location-based services and “Technology and Policy” with EFF Senior Staff Attorney Lee Tien discussing how privacy can be designed into new products. Other panels will tackle social networking services and cloud computing.

For more information on attending the roundtable including a full agenda, visit http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/workshops/privacyroundtables/index.shtml

WHAT:
FTC Roundtable “Exploring Privacy”

WHEN:
Thursday, January 28
7:45am to 6pm

WHERE:
University of California, Berkeley, School of Law
Booth Auditorium, Boalt Hall
Berkeley, CA 94720

For more information on the roundtable:
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/workshops/privacyroundtables/index.shtml

Contact:

Rebecca Jeschke
Media Relations Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
[email protected]

San Francisco – A federal judge has dismissed Jewel v. NSA, a case from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) on behalf of AT&T customers challenging the National Security Agency’s mass surveillance of millions of ordinary Americans’ phone calls and emails.

“We’re deeply disappointed in the judge’s ruling,” said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. “This ruling robs innocent telecom customers of their privacy rights without due process of law. Setting limits on Executive power is one of the most important elements of America’s system of government, and judicial oversight is a critical part of that.”

In the ruling, issued late Thursday, U.S. District Court Chief Judge Vaughn Walker held that the privacy harm to millions of Americans from the illegal spying dragnet was not a “particularized injury” but instead a “generalized grievance” because almost everyone in the United States has a phone and Internet service.

“The alarming upshot of the court’s decision is that so long as the government spies on all Americans, the courts have no power to review or halt such mass surveillance even when it is flatly illegal and unconstitutional,” said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston. “With new revelations of illegal spying being reported practically every other week — just this week, we learned that the FBI has been unlawfully obtaining Americans’ phone records using Post-It notes rather than proper legal process — the need for judicial oversight when it comes to government surveillance has never been clearer.”

Jewel v. NSA is aimed at ending the NSA’s dragnet surveillance of millions of ordinary Americans and holding accountable the government officials who illegally authorized it. Evidence in the case includes undisputed documents provided by former AT&T telecommunications technician Mark Klein showing AT&T has routed copies of Internet traffic to a secret room in San Francisco controlled by the NSA. That same evidence is central to Hepting v. AT&T, a class-action lawsuit that’s currently under appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.

For the judge’s full order:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/jewel/jeweldismissal12110.pdf

For more on warrantless wiretapping and NSA spying:
http://www.eff.org/issues/nsa-spying

Contacts:

Kevin Bankston
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
[email protected]

Cindy Cohn
Legal Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
[email protected]

Washington – A group of political activists including members of the Yes Men and the Action Factory have moved to dismiss a meritless lawsuit filed by the United States Chamber of Commerce accusing the activists of infringing the Chamber’s trademarks in the course of a political parody highlighting the Chamber’s controversial stance on climate change.

In the motion filed Tuesday, the activists — represented by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP — argue that the Chamber’s suit was designed to punish core political speech, rather than to vindicate any actual trademark harm, and should therefore be dismissed.

“U.S. courts have long recognized that trademark rights do not include the right to control language and silence critics,” said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Corynne McSherry. “This political parody was clearly protected by fair use and the First Amendment.”

At issue is a “press conference” staged by the activists in mid-October, in which the Chamber of Commerce ostensibly reversed its position and promised to stop lobbying against strong climate change legislation, a stance that has caused several prominent Chamber members to leave the organization. As has been widely reported, only minutes after the press conference got underway, a Chamber of Commerce representative rushed into the room and revealed that the Chamber’s position on climate change legislation had not in fact changed.

The Chamber responded by sending an improper copyright takedown notice to the Yes Men’s upstream Internet provider, demanding that a parody website posted in support of the action be removed immediately, which resulted in the temporary shutdown of not only the spoof site but hundreds of other sites hosted by May First/People Link. Next, the Chamber filed suit against the activists in federal court, claiming the activism infringed their trademarks.

“The Chamber’s lawsuit seeks to punish the Yes Men for exercising their constitutionally-protected free speech right to parody the Chamber of Commerce’s controversial position on climate change,” said Davis Wright Tremaine LLP attorney Thomas R. Burke.

The Chamber’s opposition to the activists’ motion is due on January 19.

For the full motion to dismiss:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/yesmen/YesMenMTDwithExA.pdf

For more on this case:
http://www.eff.org/cases/chamber-commerce-v-servin

Contacts:

Corynne McSherry
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
[email protected]

Matt Zimmerman
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
[email protected]

San Francisco – The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has asked a federal judge in San Francisco to quash a baseless subpoena aimed at outing an anonymous online critic of a Pennsylvania company called USA Technologies. A hearing in the case is set for Friday.

Earlier this year, EFF’s client — Yahoo! user “stokklerk” — posted to the Yahoo! message board dedicated to the company, criticizing USA Technologies and its CEO George Jensen, Jr., for plummeting stock prices, high compensation rates for executives, and consistent lack of profitability. Another anonymous poster had similar complaints. In response, USA Technologies filed suit in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, alleging that the statements violated federal securities regulations because they were part of a “scheme” for the authors to “enrich themselves through undisclosed manipulative trading tactics.” USA Technologies also alleged that the online posts were defamatory. As part of that lawsuit, USA Technologies issued a subpoena out of the Northern District of California to Yahoo! asking for the critics’ identities.

“The First Amendment protects the right to speak anonymously so people can express their views without fear of retribution or reprisal,” said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Matt Zimmerman. “USA Technologies might not appreciate the glare of such public criticism, but Internet users like ‘stokklerk’ have a right to post such criticism in a public forum.”

The First Amendment protects the right to speak anonymously, especially about matters of public concern such as the performance of management of publicly traded companies. In addition, several state legislatures — including California — have passed laws to further protect individuals against lawsuits targeting them for exercising First Amendment rights. In its reply brief filed Friday, EFF underscores the problems with the USA Technologies lawsuit and asks the court to block attempts to enforce the Yahoo! subpoena.

For more information on attending Friday’s hearing, contact [email protected].

For the full brief in support of the motion to quash the subpoena:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/usatechnologies/USAT-motiontoquashrepl…

For more on this case:
http://www.eff.org/cases/usa-technologies-v-stokklerk

Contact:

Matt Zimmerman
Senior Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
[email protected]

San Francisco – The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), working with the Samuelson Law, Technology, and Public Policy Clinic at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law (Samuelson Clinic), filed suit today against a half-dozen government agencies for refusing to disclose their policies for using social networking sites for investigations, data-collection, and surveillance.

Recent news reports have publicized the government’s use of social networking data as evidence in various investigations, and Congress is currently considering several pieces of legislation that may increase protections for consumers who use social-networking websites and other online tools. In response, the Samuelson Clinic made over a dozen Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests on behalf of EFF to the Central Intelligence Agency, the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security, and other agencies, asking for information about how the government collects and uses this sensitive information.

“Millions of people use social networking sites like Facebook every day, disclosing lots of information about their private lives,” said James Tucker, a student working with EFF through the Samuelson Clinic. “As Congress debates new privacy laws covering sites like Facebook, lawmakers and voters alike need to know how the government is already using this data and what is at stake.”

When several agencies did not respond to the FOIA requests, the Samuelson Clinic filed suit on behalf of EFF. The lawsuit demands immediate processing and release of all records concerning policies for the use of social networking sites in government investigations.

“Internet users deserve to know what information is collected, under what circumstances, and who has access to it,” said Shane Witnov, a law student also working on the case. “These agencies need to abide by the law and release their records on social networking surveillance.”

For the full complaint:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/social_network/social_networking_FOIA_…

Contacts:

Marcia Hofmann
Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
[email protected]

Shane Witnov
Law student
Samuelson Law, Technology, and Public Policy Clinic
[email protected]

Patenting podcasting? You’ve got to be kidding. Yet a company called Volomedia just got the Patent Office to grant them such exclusive rights.

EFF and the law firm of Howrey, LLP aren’t willing to just sit by and watch. This patent could threaten the vibrant community of podcasters and millions of podcast listeners. We want to put a stop to it, but we need your help.

The Volomedia patent covers “a method for providing episodic media.” It’s a ridiculously broad patent, covering something that many folks have been doing for many years. Worse, it could create a whole new layer of ongoing costs for podcasters and their listeners. Right now, just about anyone can create their own on-demand talk radio program, earning an audience on the strength of their ideas. But more costs and hassle means that podcasting could go the way of mainstream radio — with only the big guys able to afford an audience. And we’d have a bogus patent to blame.

In order to bust this patent, we are looking for additional “prior art” — or evidence that the podcasting methods described in the patent were already in use before November 19, 2003. In particular, we’re looking for written descriptions of methods that allow a user to download pre-programmed episodic media like audio files or video files from a remote publisher, with the download occurring after the user subscribes to the episodes, and with the user continuing to automatically receive new episodes. You can read the entire prior art request here, and if you have something that could help, please send it to [email protected] or fill out the form on our Volomedia page.

EFF’s Patent-Busting Project has taken on ten of the worst free-speech and innovation crushing software patents approved by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Eight of the ten have had a bite taken out of them so far, with two busted entirely, one narrowed, four reexams granted by the Patent office, and another one invalidated by the courts. We weren’t looking to add to our list of the “worst of the worst,” but this one was so bad we had to add it as a special bonus offender, and we can’t wait to shoot it down. As Renee DuBord Brown of Howrey said, “Overbroad patents deter innovation. Congress specifically authorized the reexamination process to correct such errors, and we are looking forward to working with EFF on this reexam.”