[312] in Privacy_Forum
[ PRIVACY Forum ] Don't Immunize Telecom Spying! -- Votes Imminent?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (privacy@vortex.com)
Sat Dec 15 18:03:44 2007
Message-Id: <200712152228.lBFMSwR9002939@chrome.vortex.com>
To: privacy-list@vortex.com
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 14:28:58 -0800
From: privacy@vortex.com
Reply-To: PRIVACY Forum Digest mailing list <privacy@vortex.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Errors-To: privacy-bounces+privacy-forum=mit.edu@vortex.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Don't Immunize Telecom Spying! -- Votes Imminent?
http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000344.html
Greetings. A must read New York Times article on the Bush
Administration's push for vast international and domestic spying on
telephone and e-mail transactional data, plus "vacuum cleaner" phone
call and data surveillance projects, should alarm everyone who cares
the least bit about their privacy
( http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/16/washington/16nsa.html ).
Of particular note are imminent Congressional votes to determine if
telecom firms will be granted immunity for spying abuses if they
participate in these clandestine government efforts.
This proposed immunity appears to be absolutely key to the firms'
open-arms, largely unquestioning participation, and for that very
reason should not be granted by Congress.
Here's why in a nutshell. If the activities that the government
wishes to pursue in this area are justifiable and legal, then the
telecoms should have nothing to worry about regarding their
cooperation. On the other hand, if these government surveillance
projects are illegal, it is not in the telecom firms' best interests
to become involved under any circumstances, given the potential
risks of consumer backlash and retroactive legal changes when such
cooperation and unfortunately likely abuses are ultimately exposed,
even if immunity is granted now.
It can be argued that these firms have no sure way to know a priori
whether or not such government inspired activities are legal today
or will be considered to be legal in the future.
This is true -- but frankly, my response is "Tough luck, that's the
cost of doing business, and if you have any concerns that something
you're being asked to do is illegal, then perhaps you should err on
the side of caution and refuse to play along."
The lack of immunity for telecom company surveillance abuses is
virtually the only friction left in the system that helps to prevent
a wholesale slide towards utterly pervasive communications spying.
If the government can successfully make its case that requested
activities are legal, so be it. Otherwise, the telecom firms should
be required to take their chances and make their decisions --
relating to government communications surveillance programs -- with
the same litigation potential as exists with their other corporate
operational decisions.
NO to telecom immunity!
--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein
lauren@vortex.com or lauren@pfir.org
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800
http://www.pfir.org/lauren
Co-Founder, PFIR
- People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
Co-Founder, NNSquad
- Network Neutrality Squad - http://www.nnsquad.org
Founder, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com
Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
_______________________________________________
privacy mailing list
http://lists.vortex.com/mailman/listinfo/privacy
