[huridocs-tech] GILC Alert, Volume 7, Issue 3

GILC Alert
Volume 7, Issue 3
29 April 2003

Welcome to the Global Internet Liberty Campaign Newsletter.

Welcome to GILC Alert, the newsletter of the Global Internet Liberty
Campaign. We are an international organization of groups working for
cyber-liberties, who are determined to preserve civil liberties and human
rights on the Internet.
We hope you find this newsletter interesting, and we very much hope that you
will avail yourselves of the action items in future issues.
If you are a part of an organization that would be interested in joining
GILC, please contact us at <gilc@gilc.org>.
If you are aware of threats to cyber-liberties that we may not know about,
please contact the GILC members in your country, or contact GILC as a whole.
Please feel free to redistribute this newsletter to appropriate forums.

===============================================
Free expression
[1] Jailed Tunisian Net dissident resumes hunger strike 
[2] China limits Net discussions of SARS epidemic
[3] File trading software distributors win legal battle
[4] US state super-DMCA bills may curb Net free speech
[5] Record companies bully student Net file sharers
[6] Vietnamese prosecution of Net dissident draws fire
[7] Kazakhstan restricts access to news and politics websites
[8] US court throws out anti-DMCA lawsuit
[9] German gov't steps up Net censorship
[10] Australian Net blocking plan criticized
[11] ISONews.com cofounder faces jail time
[12] Iranian website editor arrested 
[13] Intel e-mail case heads to California high court
[14] Net café chain settles copyright claims
[15] Al-Jazeera news site faces many problems

Privacy
[16] Report: US gov't may make controversial spy laws permanent
[17] US high court refuses to hear foreign intelligence spy case
[18] Japan ponders cybercrime measures
[19] Austria loses surveillance costs case
[20] US gov't supports music label Net user personal info grab
[21] Cisco Systems plans spy-friendly computer hardware
[22] US gov't pushes built-in Net phone spy systems
[23] New Zealand universal Net ID system sparks privacy concerns
[24] Big Brother Awards ceremonies held in UK, US

[25] EFF Pioneer Awards handed out
[26] New GILC member: HREA

===============================================================
[1] Jailed Tunisian Net dissident resumes hunger strike 
===============================================================
The proprietor of a noted Tunisian news website has begun a second hunger
strike to protest the conditions of his imprisonment.

Zouhair Yahyaoui founded and edited TUNeZINE, which included coverage of
political affairs in the North African nation and materials from opposition
party leaders. The Tunisian government arrested, tortured, then jailed him
for republishing via the Internet a letter written by his uncle that
criticized the country's legal system. During his time in jail, he had to
share a cell with 100 other inmates, and prison authorities have reportedly
denied Yahyaoui medical treatment even though he has been suffering from a
variety of serious ailments. Yahyaoui had begun a hunger strike back in
January of this year but ended it in mid-February. He then resumed his
hunger strike several weeks ago as a call to his supporters to keep up the
pressure in order to obtain his freedom; reports indicate that he has since
ended this second strike for health reasons.

These latest developments have spawned serious concern from human rights
advocates, who have noted that Yahyaoui's detention is just one of a series
of measures that Tunisian authorities have instituted to stifle dissent
online, including recently-announced plans to restrict the number of
licenses granted to cybercafes. Robert Menard, the Secretary-General of
Reporters Sans Frontieres (RSF-a GILC member), warned that the Tunisian
government had assumed a "huge responsibility" for Yahyaoui's well-being and
called "on President Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali to free him immediately and
unconditionally." 

For more about the Yahyaoui case, click
http://www.tunezine.com

An RSF press release on this subject is posted at
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=6271

====================================================
[2] China limits Net discussions of SARS epidemic
====================================================
The Chinese government is trying to prevent free-ranging online discussion
of a deadly illness that has infected thousands of people, even as it
finally has begun to reveal more details about the disease's spread.

Beijing is vetting Internet chatroom messages that mention Sudden Acute
Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). While Chinese government officials have refused
to provide any details as to what procedures they use to censor such
missives, a spokesperson at one prominent Chinese web portal explained: "The
main point is that positive postings can be posted, but those that are
negative cannot be posted. There are regulations, if the postings have a bad
influence on social stability then we can't post these kinds of things."
Moreover, many Chinese mobile phone users reportedly are no longer able to
receive text messages from overseas, after such transmissions became a
popular way for people to find out the true extent of SARS outbreaks.
Government officials in the city of Beijing have also gone so far as to
shutdown all Internet cafes, even while allowing other public gathering
places (such as restaurants) to remain open.

In addition, Chinese authorities have recently detained five people for
speaking their minds via the Information Superhighway. Three of those
people, Luo Changfu, Yuan Langsheng and Jiang Lijun, were held after
expressing support for a fellow Internet dissident, Liu Di. A fourth person,
Zhang Yuxiang, is under house arrest for various articles that he posted
online; it is unclear whether he has actually been charged with a crime.
Finally, Chinese law enforcement agents have arrested a 17-year old girl
after she posted what state media called "harmful information in an Internet
chatroom, causing a negative social influence and breaking the law";
however, the Chinese government officials have yet to disclose the contents
of her postings.

Chinese Internet users seeking to avoid such perils may soon be helped by
electronic countermeasures. The International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB),
which puts out the Voice of America radio and Internet broadcasts, has
commissioned new software to circumvent Chinese government censors, who have
blocked citizens from visiting numerous news and human rights websites,
including the homepage of Reporters Sans Frontieres (RSF-a GILC member).
Among other things, the program tunnels through Chinese blocking routines
and includes anonymizing features to make it more difficult for Chinese
authorities to hunt down individual users. The IBB's Ken Berman explained:
"The Chinese government jams all of our radio broadcasts and blocks access
by their people to our Web site. We want to allow the people there to have
the tools to be able to have a look at it."

See Maria Siow, "Chinese police work to quell SARS rumors online," Channel
NewsAsia.com, 27 April 2003 at
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/eastasia/view/38351/1/.html

For more on the Beijing Internet café shutdown, see "Sars 'still on
increase' in China," BBC News, 28 April 2003 at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/2981531.stm

Read "China gags SARS talk on Internet chatrooms," Agence France Presse, 6
April 2003 at
http://news.sify.com/cgi-bin/sifynews/news/content/news_fullstory_v2.jsp?art
icle_oid=12991376&category_oid=-20608&page_no=1

See Holly Williams, "Chinese text for virus information," BBC News Online, 8
April 2003 at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/2928969.stm

See also Shanthi Kalathil, "Battling SARS: China's silence costs lives,"
International Herald-Tribune, 3 April 2003 at
http://www.iht.com/articles/91886.html

For further information on the arrests of various Chinese Internet
dissidents, visit the Digital Freedom Network (DFN-a GILC member) website
under
http://www.dfn.org/news/china/four.htm 

Additional details are available from Human Rights in China at
http://iso.hrichina.org/iso/news_item.adp?news_id=1297

An RSF press release regarding China's blocking of its website is posted at
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=6132

To download IBB's antiblocking software, visit the Peacefire (a GILC member)
website under
http://www.peacefire.org/circumventor/simple-circumventor-instructions.html

Read Paul Festa, "Software rams great firewall of China," CNet News, 16
April 2003 at
http://news.com.com/2102-1028-997101.html

For more background information on Chinese government Internet censorship
efforts, read Staffan Thorsell, "The Great Firewall of China," MediaGuardian
(UK), 24 April 2003 at
http://media.guardian.co.uk/newmedia/story/0,7496,942956,00.html

======================================================================
[3] File trading software distributors win legal battle
======================================================================
In a closely watched case, a Federal trial court in the United States has
held that the makers of Internet file trading software are not liable for
copyright infringement by the users of their products. 

The case involved a lawsuit by several major entertainment companies against
a number of organizations that distributed free Internet file-trading
programs, including Grokster and Streamcast Networks (which provides
Morpheus software). The plaintiffs claimed that the defendants should be
held liable for copyright infringement. However, a Federal trial court in
the United States disagreed and ruled in favor of Grokster and Streamcast.
Presiding judge Stephen Wilson pointed out that the software provided by
Grokster and Streamcast was capable of many non-infringing uses (such as
"distributing movie trailers, free songs or other non-copyrighted works;
using the software in countries where it is legal; or sharing the works of
Shakespeare"), and compared them to videocassette recorders and other types
of "copying equipment," the sale of which, according to past U.S. Supreme
Court precedents, does not constitute contributory infringement. The court
also relied on the fact that Grokster and Streamcast did not have the
ability to control users and did little to "actively facilitate ...
infringing activity" by their users. Similarly, the court refused to impose
vicarious copyright liability on Grokster and Streamcast because did not
have "a right and ability to supervise the infringing activity." The
plaintiffs have signaled that they will appeal the decision.

Many free speech advocates have warmly embraced the trial court's ruling.
Cindy Cohn, Legal Director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF-a GILC
member), which represented Streamcast, explained that, "Hollywood sought to
control what innovators can make available to consumers. This ruling makes
clear that technology companies can provide general purpose tools without
fear of copyright liability."

The text of the decision (in PDF format) is available under
http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/MGM_v_Grokster/030425_order_on_motions.php

An EFF press release on this subject is posted at
http://eff.org/IP/P2P/MGM_v_Grokster/030425_morpheus_win_pr.php

Read Frank Ahrens, "File-Swap Sites Not Infringing, Judge Says," Washington
Post, 26 April 2003, page E1 at
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39322-2003Apr25.html

See John Borland, "Judge: File-swapping tools are legal," CNet News, 25
April 2003 at
http://news.com.com/2102-1027-998363.html

Read "Boost for web song-swappers," BBC News Online, 28 April 2003 at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/2982123.stm

See also Oliver Burkeman, "Court win for music-copying software," The
Guardian (UK), 28 April 2003 at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/news/0,12597,944923,00.html

Additional coverage in Spanish (Espanol) is available in "Los programas de
intercambio de ficheros no vulneran los derechos de autor, segun una
sentencia en EE.UU.," DelitosInformaticos.com, 28 April 2003 at
http://www.delitosinformaticos.com/propiedadintelectual/noticias/10515460373
4487.shtml

For further information in French (Francais), read "Phrase du jour: Grokster
et StreamCast ne sont pas significativement differentes des societes qui
vendent des magnetoscopes ou des copieurs," Transfert.net, 28 April 2003 at
http://www.transfert.net/a8731

=======================================================
[4] US state super-DMCA bills may curb Net free speech
=======================================================
A prominent film industry group is pushing for new local laws in the United
States that critics say could stifle free speech online.

The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) is urging various state
legislatures to enact proposals that, among other things, would criminalize
the possession of what the MPAA calls "unlawful communication and access
devices." While the precise contours of this legislation vary from state to
state, many of the bills would bar consumers from possessing or distributing
software that can take music or video transmitted over the Internet and
convert it to another format without the copyright holder's explicit
permission. Some forms of the legislation, such as a bill currently being
considered by the state of Colorado, also bar people from concealing or
assisting another person "to conceal from any communication service
provider, or from any lawful authority, the existence or place of origin or
destination of any communication that utilizes a communication device"--a
provision that may bar the use of anonymizing or other privacy-enhancing
software.

In a number of respects, the bills' standards are tougher than the
controversial U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which has been
savaged by many free expression experts. Indeed, Fred von Lohmann from the
Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF-a GILC member) described these
"super-DMCA measures" as "special interest legislation that dramatically
expands the reach of the federal DMCA, which has already put fair use,
innovation, free speech and competition in peril. Communication service
providers -- meaning ISPs [Internet service providers], cable companies, and
providers of digital entertainment services -- can use this legislation to
restrict what you can connect to your Internet connection and cable or
satellite television lines and can ban a variety of tools critical to
protecting the anonymity and security of Internet users." Other groups have
expressed similar sentiments, such as the American Library Association,
which issued a letter along with two other library groups warning that "some
of the proposed amendments will undermine the ability of libraries to
provide important information services." 

For further information, visit the EFF website under
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/states/20030414_eff_sdmca_pr.php

See Benny Evangelista, "Heading off film piracy: Movie trade group staying
one step ahead in lobbying efforts," San Francisco Chronicle, 28 April 2003,
page E1 at
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/04/28/BU269543.DTL

Read Declan McCullagh, "DMCA critics decry state-level proposals," CNet
News, 28 March 2003 at
http://news.com.com/2102-1028-994667.html

For coverage in German (Deutsch), read Detlef Borchers, "Forschungsfreiheit
von 'Super-DMCA' bedroht," Heise Online, 20 April 2003 at
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/jk-20.04.03-008/

====================================================
[5] Record companies bully student Net file sharers
====================================================
A major recording industry trade group has launched legal attacks against
several University students over their online activities.

The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) is suing 4 students in
the United States for running file-sharing programs on campus computer
networks. The RIAA claims that by doing so, they allowed other people to
violate copyright laws by trading music files using the programs (named
Direct Connect, Flatlan and Phynd). The file-sharing software in question
did not allow access by all Internet users, but only other individuals who
happened to have accounts with the respective universities (so, for example,
Princeton University students could use the program installed on Princeton's
computer network). Reports indicate that the RIAA did not tell the affected
universities (Princeton, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and Michigan
Technological University) beforehand about its impending action. 

Not surprisingly, the RIAA's legal assault has led to considerable concern
from educators and cyber-rights experts. Among other things, there is
growing fear that the trade group's actions may chill academic discourse
online. Furthermore, questions remain as to whether the RIAA's methods may
deter people from using various types of computer programs even if they can
be used for non-copyright infringement purposes. 

Read "Students sued in piracy battle," BBC News Online, 4 April 2003 at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/2917779.stm

See "Music Biz Sues Student File-Swappers," CBSNews.com, 4 April 2003 at
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/04/04/tech/printable547687.shtml

For coverage in Spanish (Espanol), see "Demandos estudiantes estadounidenses
por intercambio de archivos musicales," DelitosInformativos.com, 7 April
2003 at
http://www.delitosinformaticos.com/propiedadintelectual/noticias/10497161601
0254.shtml 

Further information in German (Deutsch) is available from "US-Universitaat
beklagt sich ueber Musikindustrie," Heise Online, 10 April 2003 at
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/anw-10.04.03-002/

========================================================
[6] Vietnamese prosecution of Net dissident draws fire
========================================================
Cyberliberties advocates have condemned the Vietnamese government for
attempting to prosecute a human rights activist on espionage charges. 

Vietnamese authorities have arrested Dr. Nguyen Dan Que after he allegedly
sent information critical of the Vietnamese government through the Internet.
He had only recently been released as part of a prison amnesty program after
serving part of a 20-year jail sentence. Vietnamese government officials
have searched his house and seized his computer as well as various written
materials. He has since been charged with violating the country's espionage
laws; if convicted, Nguyen could face the death penalty. 

Several groups, including Human Rights Watch (HRW-a GILC member) vehemently
objected to Hanoi's actions. HRW's executive director for Asia, Brad Adams,
charged that although "Vietnam has signed UN treaties protecting the right
to free expression ... it's locking up citizens using the Internet to
express their views. This is going on while Vietnam is participating in
deliberations of the United Nations' highest human rights body. Delegates
should publicly call on Vietnam to cease these arrests."

An HRW press release on this subject is posted under
http://hrw.org/press/2003/03/vietnam033103.htm

===============================================================
[7] Kazakhstan restricts access to news and politics websites
===============================================================
Kazakhstan apparently has restricted access to numerous Internet sites in an
attempt to stifle dissent against the ruling regime.

Kazakhstani authorities are imposing these blocking restrictions on all
customers of the country's sole Internet service provider (ISP),
Kazakhtelecom. The list of censored materials includes the websites of
various independent online news bureaus and several leading opposition party
leaders. Many of these sites contained articles that criticized the
President of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, and a number of other
prominent government officials accused of corruption. Kazakhstani citizens
are only able to visit the censored webpages through overseas ISPs, but are
then subject to long time delays that can last 30 minutes or so.

Free speech advocates have condemned the government's blocking campaign.
Robert Menard, the secretary-general of Reporters Sans Frontieres (RSF-a
GILC member) complained in a letter to Kazakhstani culture and information
minister Mukhtar Kul-Mukhamed that the "near-monopoly of the state-owned
Kazakhtelecom as an Internet service provider ... must not be used to block
independent and diverse news. We ask you to make every effort to ensure the
free flow of online news and to end all censorship of news websites,
whatever their editorial line."

An RSF press release on this subject is posted at
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=6122

====================================================
[8] US court throws out anti-DMCA lawsuit
====================================================
A United States Federal trial court has thrown out a challenge to a
much-maligned copyright statute. 

The case centers on a blocking package manufactured by N2H2 that is used by
thousands of public schools and governmental agencies in the U.S. Harvard
University student Ben Edelman, who was investigating the extent to which
N2H2's program prevents access to Internet sites, worried that his
activities might run afoul of the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act
(DMCA), as well as N2H2's license, which warns users that they may not "copy
or make any changes or modifications to the software" or "decrypt, decode,
translate, decompile, disassemble or otherwise reverse engineer the
software." These fears came in light of several incidents where various
industry-related groups, such as technology giant Hewlett-Packard, had
threatened computer researchers with DMCA-related legal action. 

He then filed papers asking a U.S. Federal court to declare that he had a
right to examine N2H2's blocking program and "to share his research tools
and results with others." Edelman, who was represented by the American Civil
Liberties Union (ACLU-a GILC member), believed that "the public has a right
to know what is being blocked, and I believe I have a right to uncover this
information without being subject to a corporate lawsuit."

However, the presiding judge Richard Sterns dismissed Edelman's claims. In
Sterns' opinion, "[T]here is no plausibly protected constitutional interest
that Edelman can assert that outweighs" N2H2's assertions of copyright, nor
was there "any pending credible threat of a criminal prosecution if" Edelman
were to move forward with his project. Curiously, the judge went so far as
to compare Edelman's scholarly research to "an invasive and destructive
trespass."
 
To read the text of the court order (in PDF format), click
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/edelman/edelman-v-n2h2/order-040703.pdf

Read Declan McCullagh, "ACLU loses digital copyright battle," CNet News, 9
April 2003 at 
http://news.com.com/2102-1025-996245.html
   
For further information in German (Deutsch), read "US Gericht wehrt Angriff
auf Copyright-Gesetz ab," Heise Online, 10 April 2003 at
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/anw-10.04.03-005/

====================================================
[9] German gov't steps up Net censorship
====================================================
The German government has adopted new rules to restrict various types of
digital expression.

Under the "the Treaty on Human Rights & the Protection of Minors in
Broadcasting and Telecommunication Media," current regulations and indexing
schemes for films and videos can now be applied to computer games and the
Internet. The country's Minor Protection Law also has been altered to ban
electronic media and computer games that "glorify war." Furthermore, a new
committee (called the Kommission fuer Juegendmedienschutz) will be created
to sift through online content for possible blocking. 

Questions remain as to what extent these changes will have a detrimental
impact on Internet free speech. Some of these fears are due to the
relatively vague wording of the new rules, such as a provision barring
materials that "apparently could harm children and minors seriously." 

Read "Sperrverfuegungen gegen Websites: Einer kam durch," Heise Online, 7
April 2003 at
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/jk-07.04.03-005/ 

Read "German law shields children from content," Washington Internet Daily,
3 April 2003 at
http://www.computeruser.com/news/03/04/03/news5.html



========================================================
[10] Bill to restrict Aussie Net blocking system details
========================================================
Cyber-liberties advocates and various political leaders are crying foul over
an Australian government proposal that they say would further prevent public
oversight of a controversial Internet censorship regime.

Nearly 4 years ago, the Australian government passed the Broadcast Services
Amendment (Online Services) Act, which restricted Internet content based on
a rating scheme previously used for films. Current exemptions in the
country's Freedom of Information Act (FOI) have allowed several government
agencies, most notably the Australian Broadcasting Authority (ABA), to deny
access (on a case by case basis) to various types of information regarding
the scheme. Thus, when Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA-a GILC member)
requested data regarding the government's content restriction system, the
ABA blacked out details such as website addresses and names/titles of
prohibited online content prior to releasing the relevant documents-a
decision that was upheld by an Administrative Appeal Tribunal. 

Since then, the Australian government has begun considering a new plan to
create a blanket FOI exemption, thereby allowing the ABA, the Office of Film
and Literature Classification (OFLC) and the Classification (Censorship)
Boards to prevent the release of a broader range of information that does
not include identifying information about, or copies of, prohibited content.
Thus, documents that were previously released regarding the censorship
scheme with some information blacked out would not be released at all. The
move came even though the government has not provided any legitimate reason
for curtailing citizens' rights to access information concerning the
operations of the ABA and OFLC, or any indication, let alone evidence, that
FOI law has been or can be misused.  Not surprisingly, EFA issued a
statement contending that the FOI amendments "should be rejected outright
and the Broadcasting Services Act should be amended to require the ABA and
OFLC to make freely and publicly available the same amount of information
about classification decisions concerning online content as has long been
made readily available about classification of movies, publications and
computer games."

While the proposal has passed the Australia's House of Representatives, it
is expected to receive a hostile reception in the Senate (which is in recess
until mid-May 2003). The chief Federal opposition party, the Australian
Labor Party (ALP) has voiced serious concern over the FOI amendments, as
ALP's Shadow Minister for Communications, Lindsay Tanner, explained: "In the
Senate, Labor will be seeking the support of the minor parties and
Independents to remove this part of the bill. Labor will not permit the
government to fundamentally undermine the freedom of information regime in
this country, which is so fundamental to ensuring that we have genuine
public scrutiny and accountability with respect to government agencies."

For further information, visit the EFA website under
http://www.efa.org.au/FOI/clabill2002/

============================================
[11] ISONews.com cofounder faces jail time
============================================
The cofounder of a technology news website is headed to prison after
pleading guilty to violating a heavily criticized copyright law. 

David Rocci, who helped found ISONews.com, has been sentenced to 5 months in
prison as part of a plea deal. Previously, the United States Department of
Justice (DoJ) had seized the website's domain name, claiming that Rocci had
violated the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act by selling microchips
that allow Xbox computer game console users to play games from other
geographic regions as well as bootleg versions and backup copies. The DoJ is
now redirecting would-be ISOnews.com visitors to a special government
webpage. 

The case has drawn concern from various cyber-rights groups. Fred von
Lohmann from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF-a GILC member) said it
was "troubling that people are being sent to prison for selling a device
that may have uses that may not be infringing to copyright at all." In
addition, some observers are worried that the DoJ's tactics may allow
tracking of innocent people (such as investigative journalists) whose
personal information may be revealed as they are transferred to the
government website. 

Read "US mod chip retailer jailed and fined," The Register (UK), 9 April
2003 at
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/30165.html

See "Microsoft cuts console cost," BBC News Online, 10 April 2003 at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/2934621.stm

For information in Spanish (Espanol), read "Sentencia en Estados Unidos por
la venta de chips para la modificación de consola de videojuegos,"
DelitosInformaticos.com, 10 April 2003 at
http://www.delitosinformaticos.com/noticias/104998679837318.shtml

Press coverage in German (Deutsch) is available in "Haftstraf fuer
Modchip-Haendler," Heise Online, 10 April 2003 at
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/anw-10.04.03-001/

===============================================================
[12] Iranian website editor arrested 
===============================================================
Authorities in Iran have arrested a journalist over his Internet speech
activities. 

Sina Motallebi had previously worked a daily newspaper, Hayat-é-No, that was
shut down this past January. Afterwards, as editor of the news website
www.rooznegar.com, he expressed support for a number of Hayat-e-No reporters
who had been imprisoned, and criticized reform-minded Iranian leaders for
failing to defend his former colleagues. Motallebi was then accused of
"undermining national security through a cultural activity"; after having
been summoned numerous times by Iranian government officials, he was
apparently arrested and interrogated several days ago by a special Tehran
police division dedicated to punishing "moral" offenses.

Motallebi's predicament has angered many Internet free speech groups. Robert
Menard from Reporters Sans Frontieres (RSF-a GILC member) called for
Motallebi to be released and pointed out: "This is the second journalist to
be arrested this year for running a website. It comes as the United Nations
Human Rights Commission is due to issue a report on Iran. Regardless of what
the report says, the Iranian regime should know that sooner or later it will
have to answer for its arbitrary arrests of journalists." 

An RSF press release on this subject is posted at
http://www.rsf.org/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=20

========================================================
[13] Intel e-mail case heads to state high court
========================================================
If someone sends several email messages to his colleagues complaining about
his former employer's practices, should that person be held liable for
trespassing?
 
This issue was recently debated before the California Supreme Court. The
case centers around Ken Hamidi, who was fired by chipmaking giant Intel due
to a disagreement over a work-related injury. He then sent a number of email
messages to thousands of Intel staffers that took the company to task over
the way it treated its employees. The firm eventually sued Hamidi and won a
decision from California's Third Appellate District Court, which curiously
held that he had trespassed on Intel's property by sending the
aforementioned messages and banned him from sending any more emails.  Hamidi
has since appealed the ruling.

Many legal experts worry that the decision, if upheld, would seriously erode
free speech rights in cyberspace. Lee Tien from the Electronic Frontier
Foundation (EFF-a GILC member) explained that the state Supreme Court "heard
arguments explaining why extending the trespass to chattels doctrine to
electronic communications would be very hard to justify. The court seemed
unwilling to rule that anyone who sends electronic communications after
having been told not to could risk a lawsuit from recipients." Similarly,
Ann Brick, a lawyer with the Northern California affiliate of the American
Civil Liberties Union (ACLU-a GILC member), called Intel's actions
"censorship. This is about an employer or some other third party deciding
what kind of e-mail I can send that you receive."

An EFF press release concerning this case is posted under
http://eff.org/Cases/Intel_v_Hamidi/20030402_eff_hamidi_pr.php

Read Harriet Chiang, "Ruling could redefine parameters of free speech rights
in cyberspace," San Francisco Chronicle, 2 April 2003 at
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/04/02
/MN181676.DTL

=============================================
[14] Net café chain settles copyright claims
=============================================
The recording industry has settled its lawsuit against a global business
mogul over alleged copyright violations.

Stelios Haji-Iannou founded the EasyGroup business empire, which includes
the EasyInternet Café chain as well as the European airline EasyJet. Several
prominent recording industry organizations, including the British
Phonographic Industry (which represents Universal, Virgin and EMI) sued
EasyGroup, claiming that the company should be held liable for music that
allegedly has been downloaded illegally by EasyInternet Café customers. Sony
went so far as to ask the court for a "gag order" to prevent public
discussion of the dispute-a request that was denied. A British trial court
ruled against cybercafe chain; in response, Haji-Iannou accused the
presiding judge of failing to answer one of his firm's key arguments: that
downloading music was a legally permitted fair use, similar to recording a
television program for later viewing.

Earlier this month, EasyInternet agreed to pay GBP 80 000 in damages as well
as GBP 130 000 in legal costs. The settlement is being seen as largely a
business decision, especially since, as Haji-Iannou himself explained, the
payment was far smaller than the amount that was originally demanded from
his company: "They came back with an attractive offer - a 92% discount on
the original claim." 

Read "Net café settles over music rights," BBC News Online, 9 April 2003 at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/music/2933163.stm

See also Owen Gibson, "Stelios settles music copyright row," Guardian
Unlimited, 9 April 2003 at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/news/0,12597,933707,00.html
 
====================================================
[15] Al-Jazeera news site faces many problems
====================================================
The website of a prominent independent Arabic-language news broadcaster has
been beset with numerous difficulties over the past month or so.

For a time, attackers were able to redirect Internet traffic away from the
English language version of Al-Jazeera homepage. Would-be visitors were
instead sent to a webpage with an American flag and the slogan "Let Freedom
Ring." Although the problem has since been corrected, the site has also been
hit with repeated denial-of-service attacks. In addition, several companies
have terminated service agreements with Al-Jazeera or otherwise let such
agreements expire, notably web server giant Akamai.

Al Jazeera's difficulties have drawn considerable attention from free speech
activists. The Association for Progressive Communications (APC-a GILC
member) deplored the situation, saying that the "Internet must be allowed to
freely perform its unique and vital role as a promoter of 'freedom of
expression' and content diversity, especially in times of conflict. The
computer hacks, online vandalism and the canceling of Al-Jazeera's web
hosting contract all interfere with the UN [United Nations] declared right
to 'receive and impart information and ideas through any media and
regardless of frontiers.'"

The Al Jazeera website is located at
http://www.aljazeera.net

For the English-language version, click
http://english.aljazeera.net

The APC press release is posted at
http://www.apc.org/english/news/index.shtml?x=10848

For further information, visit the Digital Freedom Network (DFN-a GILC
member) website under
http://dfn.org/news/mideast/al-jazeera.htm

See "US turns to net for war updates," BBC News Online, 8 April 2003 at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/2925289.stm

Read Sandeep Junnarkar, "Akamai ends Al-Jazeera server support," CNet News,
4 April 2003 at
http://news.com.com/1200-1035-995546.html

For further information in German (Deutsch), see "Wirbel um Website von Al
Jazeera (Update)," Heise Online, 27 March 2003 at
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/jk-27.03.03-007/

===============================================================
[16] Report: US gov't may make controversial spy laws permanent
===============================================================
Several United States policymakers are reportedly hoping to make permanent
various controversial changes to government surveillance laws.

The measures, which were adopted in late 2001, allowed the U.S. government
to make greater use of controversial spy tools such as Carnivore. Among
other things, the legislation applied loose pen register protections
previously used for such information as phone numbers and applied them to
the Information Superhighway, rather than requiring law enforcement agents
to show probable cause that a crime is being committed and get a court
order. It also expanded the powers of a secret United States court, created
under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), whose procedural
protections are not as strong as those of other tribunals. In addition, the
measures provided the government with the ability to break into houses and
conduct secret "sneak-and-peek" searches. A number of these powers were
scheduled to expire or "sunset" by 2005. However, U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch
has reportedly drafted a proposal to remove the "sunset" language, thereby
allowing the weakened standards to remain in place indefinitely.

The move comes despite growing public concern over whether the U.S.
government is already abusing its powers under the 2001 changes. According
to records revealed through Freedom of Information Act requests from various
groups, including GILC members the Electronic Privacy Information Center and
the American Civil Liberties Union, the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation
has sent out hundreds of "national security letters," thereby forcing
businesses to turn over electronic records about finances, telephone calls,
e-mail and other personal data. These letters are issued without prior
judicial approval, and the recipients of such letters are barred from
telling anyone (including their customers) about the FBI's requests. In
addition, U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft has apparently signed three
times more "emergency foreign intelligence warrants" than in the past 23
years. The ACLU's Jameel Jaffer warned: "Without judicial oversight, there
is simply no assurance that the Attorney General is using this authority in
keeping with democratic principles and constitutional rights."

Read "GOP wants to keep anti-terror powers; Broad spying tools would become
permanent," New York Times, 9 April 2003 at
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/04/09
/MN257910.DTL

An ACLU press release regarding the increased use of spy powers is posted at
http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=12166&c=206

Read Dan Eggen and Robert O'Harrow Jr., "U.S. Steps Up Secret Surveillance,"
Washington Post, 24 March 2003 at
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A1
6287-2003Mar23&notFound=true

=================================================================
[17] US high court refuses to hear foreign intelligence spy case
=================================================================
The United States Supreme Court has decided not to review an intelligence
tribunal's ruling that many experts fear will greatly erode privacy online.

Previously, the United States Justice Department had pushed revised rules
that would allow investigators to conduct surveillance operations and get
search warrants under the looser standards of the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act (FISA), even if the primary purpose of the wiretapping or
search is not to collect foreign intelligence. Under this theory, law
enforcement agents could make use of such standards so long as foreign
intelligence gathering was merely a "significant" purpose. A Federal trial
court disagreed and ordered Federal officials, among other things, to
"ensure that law enforcement officials do not direct or control the use of
the FISA procedures to enhance criminal prosecution."

Subsequently, in its first-ever decision, the U.S. Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Court of Review essentially threw out the trial court's
decision and ruled in favor of the government. The appeals court's opinion,
FISA "did not preclude or limit the government's use or proposed use of
foreign intelligence information, which included evidence of certain kinds
of criminal activity, in a criminal prosecution." Among other things, the
3-judge panel went on to say that the trial court did not have the power
under the U.S. Constitution to take prior restrictions on foreign
intelligence gathering operations and impose "them generically as
minimization procedures." 

Several organizations (including GILC members the Center for Democracy and
Technology, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, the American Civil
Liberties Union and the Open Society Institute) who had previously filed
legal papers urging the appeals panel to uphold the lower court's ruling
then called on the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the appeals panel's
decision. However, the high Court rejected their request. Ann Beeson of the
ACLU expressed frustration over this setback but vowed to fight on: "We will
continue to press Congress and the courts to curb abuse of government spy
powers."

An ACLU press release on this subject is posted at
http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=12167&c=206

===============================================================
[18] Japan ponders cybercrime measures
===============================================================
The Japanese government is considering new cybercrime measures that may have
a significant impact on Internet privacy.

Although specifics regarding the proposal are still hard to come by, among
other things, the plan would apparently require Internet service providers
(ISPs) to retain e-mail and other information up to 90 days without
subscribers' knowledge. ISPs who refuse to comply with these retention
requirements could face heavy penalties. In addition, creating a computer
virus or providing it to others would be made punishable by up to three
years in prison, even if it has not caused any damage. Proponents of the
legislation claim that it is necessary in order for Japan to join the
Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime, despite the fact that the
Convention does not actually require data retention. 

The entire proposal is expected to be debated in the Diet (Japanese
parliament) sometime in the next few months. However, a number of observers
expect the proposal to engender serious opposition, due to the potentially
great privacy implications. Industry groups, including many ISPs, are also
expected to voice objections over portions of the bill, such as a provision
that would force providers to retain data to aid the investigation of
certain acts even if they are not considered criminal in Japan. 

For further details on the data retention proposal, see "Stiffer e-data
rules eyed," Asahi Shimbun, 17 March 2003 at
http://www.asahi.com/english/national/K2003031700230.html

===============================================================
[19] Austria loses surveillance costs case
===============================================================
Telecommunication companies in Austria have won an important court case
against the federal government regarding a controversial surveillance law. 

The case revolved around two subsections of Austria's Telecommunications Law
(Telekommunikationsgesetz or TKG). Taken together, those subsections
essentially required telecom companies to implement surveillance measures on
behalf of law enforcement agents and pay for these measures themselves. The
technical requirements for such spyware (which may change every year) are
not specifically provided in those provisions and must be provided through
secondary legislation. Several communications firms challenged the TKG
subsections in court, charging that those provisions were unconstitutional
under various legal theories, including vagueness and proportionality
grounds. 

The Austrian Federal Constitutional Court ruled that the statute "imposes a
significant burden on third parties [that] may only be justified for
exceptional circumstances." More specifically, the judges held that the two
contested TKG subsections violated the right of property and the liberty of
profession or business guaranteed under the Austrian Constitution because
the provisions were not proportional and did not meet the principle of
clarity. The court ordered that, starting in 2004, the government would have
shoulder the economic burden by reimbursing communications companies for
implementing wiretapping measures, unless the "exceptional circumstances"
mentioned earlier exist.

To read the verdict (in PDF format), click
http://www.vfgh.gv.at/vfgh/presse/G37-16-02.pdf

For an English-language outline of the decision and commentary, visit the
Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC-a GILC member) website under
http://www.epic.org/privacy/intl/austrian_vfgh-022703.html

===============================================================
[20] US gov't supports music label Net user personal info grab
===============================================================
The United States government is backing a recording industry trade group in
its efforts to collect personal information about an alleged Internet file
trader.

Several months ago, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)
requested data concerning a subscriber of telecom giant Verizon. The RIAA
claimed that the individual in question had engaged in copyright
infringement through peer-to-peer music file trading over the Internet. The
Association argued that it had the power to gather such information under
the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) even though it has not
actually filed a lawsuit yet. The cited DMCA provision essentially says that
copyright owners can request a U.S. Federal court to subpoena "information
sufficient to identify the alleged infringer" from a "service provider."
Verizon refused, claiming that this power can only be used when infringing
material is stored or controlled on the service provider's network. A number
of privacy groups, including GILC members the Electronic Frontier Foundation
(EFF), Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) and the
Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), filed legal papers expressing
opposition to the RIAA's demands. A trial court in the U.S. subsequently
agreed with the RIAA and has now ordered Verizon to turn over the requested
information within 14 days; Verizon is in the process of appealing the trial
court's decision.

In the meantime, the U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ) has filed papers with
the appeals court siding with the RIAA. Among other things, the DoJ
essentially claimed that the release of personal information about the
Verizon customer would not have a negative impact on ordinary people who
communicate through the Internet because "the DMCA's subpoena provision
targets the identity of alleged copyright infringers, not spoken words or
conduct commonly associated with expression." Verizon Vice President Sarah
Deutsch was dismayed by the government's decision: "We would have expected
they would have recognized there are important privacy and safety issues
beyond the narrow copyright claims here."

To read the text of the trial court's order (in PDF format), visit the
website of the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT-a GILC member) under
http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/03-ms-0040.pdf

For the latest details, read John Borland, "Verizon gets 14 days to ID
file-swapper," CNet News, 24 April 2003 at
http://news.com.com/2102-1027-998268.html

See also "Verizon Must Reveal Song Swappers," Associated Press, 24 April
2003 at
http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,58620,00.html

See "Fed favors record labels over Verizon," Reuters, 18 April 2003 at 
http://news.com.com/2102-1027-997568.html

For information in German (Deutsch), read "US-Justizministerium: Preisgabe
der Identitaet eines Kazaa-Nutzers richtig," Heise Online, 20 April 2003 at
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/jk-20.04.03-005/

To read a friend-of-the-court brief filed by various privacy groups
(including EPIC, EFF and CPSR) in PDF format, click
http://www.eff.org/Cases/RIAA_v_Verizon/20020830_eff_amicus.pdf

===============================================================
[21] Cisco Systems plans spy-friendly Internet hardware
===============================================================
A leading telecommunications hardware maker is planning to redesign its
products to make it easier for government agents to spy on Internet users.

Cisco Systems has unveiled a proposal published to build "lawful
interception" features into its devices. While many of the details have
still yet to be worked out, under the proposal, wiretapping "must be
undetectable," and various government agencies could simultaneously spy on
the same person without being aware of each other's operations. Internet
service providers (ISPs) would also decrypt customers' messages and hand the
information over to law enforcement agents, assuming that the ISPs have
access to the relevant encryption keys. 

Cisco's apparent attempt to appease would-be wiretappers has alarmed
cyber-rights experts. Marc Rotenberg, the executive director of the
Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC-a GILC member), wondered "why
the technical community should hardwire surveillance standards and not also
hardwire accountability standards like audit logs and public reporting. The
laws that permit 'lawful interception' typically incorporate both
components--the (interception) authority and the means of oversight--but the
(Cisco) implementation seems to have only the surveillance component. That
is no guarantee that the authority will be used in a 'lawful' manner."

Read Declan McCullagh, "Inside Cisco's eavesdropping apparatus," CNet News,
21 April 2003 at
http://news.com.com/2102-1071-997528.html

===============================================================
[22] US gov't pushes built-in Net phone spy systems
===============================================================
A number of recent events regarding phone calls made over the Internet have
led to questions about the future of privacy online.

On one front, the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) wants the
Federal Communications Commission to rule that the Communications Assistance
for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) applies to phone calls made over the
Internet, including transmissions using the Voice over Internet Protocol
(VoIP). CALEA, which was passed in 1994, generally requires telecom
companies to build surveillance capabilities into their networks, but
exempts information services, most notably the Internet. The FBI has pushed
for this authority even though it has failed to cite in public any case
where wiretapping efforts were thwarted by VoIP. 

The FBI's stance has caused anxiety among privacy advocates and industry
leaders. David Sobel from the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC-a
GILC member) worries that, among other things, if the FBI gets its way, the
use of surveillance tools to spy on Internet phone calls could be used for
unnecessary government spying on other types of Internet transmissions, such
as surfed webpages and private email messages. Additionally, Internet
service providers are concerned about who will be forced to pay for
installing such spy devices. Further complicating matters is the fact that
there are no universal standards for such wiretapping operations, in part
because no universal standards exist even for creating VoIP networks. 

In addition to the FBI's efforts, Vonage DigitalVoice, the biggest provider
of VoIP service, is apparently partnering with another company, Intrado, to
provide automatic locational tracking of people who make Internet phone
calls. Reports indicate that Vonage's customers (which number in the tens of
thousands) will be required to give their address, city, state and postal
code to be stored in Intrado's databases. While the system is supposed to be
used for tracking of emergency 911 calls, questions remain as to whether
this system eventually will be used for other purposes, such as
geolocational mass marketing.

Read Ben Charny, "Net phone services get 911 capability," CNet News, 22
April 2003 at
http://news.com.com/2102-1037-997851.html

See also Anick Jesdanun, "Tapping Into Web Telephony," Associated Press, 4
April 2003 at
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/04/04/tech/printable547765.shtml

=================================================================
[23] New Zealand universal Net ID system sparks privacy concerns
=================================================================
Public concern is rising over efforts in New Zealand that may lead to a
national online identification system.

During the past month, there have been a number of developments suggesting
that such a system may not be far off. For one thing, the country's Inland
Revenue Department (IRD) inaugurated its first password-protected service,
which allows members of the public to access various government databases.
Soon afterwards, New Zealand State Services Minister Trevor Mallard publicly
hinted that he wants one agency to handle password authentication for all
online Government services. Some observers subsequently calling for this
comprehensive authentication system to be expanded and used for surfing the
World Wide Web, sending and receiving email, reading electronic documents,
and using instant messaging systems. The New Zealand State Services
Commission is now preparing a report on this issue that apparently will be
released in the middle of 2003. 

However, a number of groups have expressed serious reservations about these
ideas. One industry spokesperson suggested that "there are too many privacy
implications," and that such a widescale system, if implemented, might make
identity fraud a "damn sight easier." There are also worries over the
potential costs of implementing the proposal as well as providing customer
support. 

Read Richard Wood, "Fears over public ID system to access Govt services
online," New Zealand Herald, 22 April 2003 at
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3450452&#038;thesection=t
echnology&#038;thesubsection=general 

==================================================
[24] Big Brother Awards ceremonies held in UK, US
==================================================
Privacy International (PI-a GILC member) recently held its annual Big
Brother Awards ceremonies for 2003 in Britain and the United States. These
prizes are designed to publicize some of the most serious threats to
individual privacy. 

United Kingdom winners included London Mayor Ken Livingstone (the year's
Worst Public Servant for "his obsession with travel and transport
surveillance"), Capita (deemed the Most Invasive company for being "behind
many of the government's most controversial surveillance and data management
schemes"), the Piu Data Sharing Report (the British "government's
discredited Entitlement Card proposal," which was termed the year's Most
Appalling Project), the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) (the
Most Heinous Government Organisation for having "recently gone beyond merely
being a patsy for bad government policy," and taking "a more active role in
developing and promoting invasive schemes"), and British Prime Minister Tony
Blair (a Lifetime Menace because of "his active involvement in the
government's attack on civil liberties"). A new "Dog Poo on a Stick" Award
was given to British Home Secretary David Blunkett for being "so odious and
contemptible" that the organizers were "reluctant to agree to spending
scarce money on an expensive gold award for the villain." Five Winston
awards were given out to defenders of individual privacy, including Dr.
Roger Needham (posthumous), Teri Dowty (Joint national coordinator,
Childrens Rights Alliance for England and Wales), Marion Chester (Legal
Director, Association of Community Health Councils of England and Wales),
STAND (a volunteer organization that has fought strenuously against various
privacy-invasive proposals and legislation), Richard Norton-Taylor and
Stuart Millar (from the British newspaper the Guardian), and the video
activist group Undercurrents.

Meanwhile, the United States government received several of the year's
American Big Brother awards, including Most Invasive Proposal (for the Total
Informational Awareness project) and Worst Public Official (to Assistant
Attorney General Viet Dinh, who "was the architect of the PATRIOT Act and of
the Attorney General's Guidelines, which now allow the FBI [Federal Bureau
of Investigation] to engage in searches and monitoring of chat rooms,
bulletin boards, and websites without evidence of criminal wrongdoing").
Other winners included Osama Bin Laden, who received an Admiral John M.
Poindexter Lifetime Menace for "giving [U.S.] Attorney General Ashcroft the
excuse he needed to pass the USA PATRIOT Act and the Homeland Security Act,
and the gall necessary to formulate PATRIOT II, new draft legislation
designed to push police power even further" and Delta Airlines, which was
dubbed the Greatest Corporate Invader for helping to test the U.S.
government's Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening System II-a system
that "relies heavily on the commercial information brokers to provide
personal data on individuals." The list of Brandeis recipients (for their
support of privacy rights) included consumer advocate Ed Mierzwinski, North
Dakota state representative Jim Kasper ("a business leader and tireless
advocate of opt-in privacy laws"), Charlene Nelson ("a North Dakota farmer
who led a successful referendum in her state to reestablish opt-in privacy
rules) and bookseller Joyce Meskis (who "led an important battle for book
buyer privacy").

The U.S. Big Brother Awards were handed out at the Computers, Freedom and
Privacy (CFP) 2003 Conference, which also featured the first-ever
presentation of the Stupid Security Awards. The Australian government
garnered a Most Egregiously Stupid Award "for a litany of pointless,
irritating and self-serving security measures," such as creating a
"suspicious" activity hotline without explaining what activities should be
considered "suspicious." Philadelphia International Airport got a Most
Inexplicably Stupid Award "for over-reaction to a bottle of cologne,"
including issuing a code-red hazardous materials alert, quarantining an
entire hospital emergency room and shutting down 2 shops. The British arm of
phone giant T-Mobile won a Most Annoyingly Stupid Award "for pointless and
idiotic financial security measures," such as forcing customers to send in
two credit card bills along with the details of their phones in order to pay
for services by credit card. The Delta Airlines terminal at New York's John
F. Kennedy airport received a Most Flagrantly Intrusive Award "for forcing a
nursing mother to drink her own breast milk," and San Francisco General
Hospital won a Most Stupidly Counter Productive Award "for blind idiocy in
its identity checking procedures," including turning away homeless potential
patients because they did not have photo identification cards.  A special
Dishonourable Mention award was given to the hotel that hosted the CFP 2003
conference, the New Yorker Hotel, "after a series of absurd security
measures." These included demanding and photocopying photo ID's, refusing to
loan a guest a pair of scissors "because of security," and threatening
another guest with a visit from the anti-terrorism squad of NY police if he
continued to refuse to provide photo ID."

For more on the 2003 British Big Brother Awards, click
http://www.privacyinternational.org/bigbrother/uk2003/

Further details regarding the 2003 U.S. Big Brother Awards are available
under
http://www.privacyinternational.org/bigbrother/us2003/

Read "Mayor Ken named Big Bad Brother," BBC News Online, 25 March 2003 at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/2882317.stm

Additional information concerning the Stupid Security competition is posted
at
http://www.privacyinternational.org/activities/stupidsecurity/

See also "Security by stupidity," BBC News Online, 10 April 2003 at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/2931685.stm

The official CFP 2003 website is located at
http://www.cfp2003.org

==========================================
[25] EFF Pioneer Awards handed out
==========================================
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF-a GILC member) honored its newest
Pioneer Awards laureates. These awards are given out each to "individuals
who have made significant and influential contributions to the development
of computer-mediated communications or to the empowerment of individuals in
using computers and the Internet." 

The winners for 2003 are David Sobel, Eben Moglen and Amy Goodman. Mr. Sobel
is general counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC-a
GILC member) and has worked for years to defend privacy rights and open
information laws. Mr. Moglen, who is a professor at the Columbia University
School of Law and has served for years as general counsel for the Free
Software Foundation, was applauded "for campaigning to reformulate
copyright, patent, and privacy laws to fit the digital age." Amy Goodman has
hosted the Pacifica Radio Network's award winning news show Democracy Now,
was honored "for her long-term commitment to freedom of expression."

An EFF press release regarding the 2003 Pioneer Awards is posted under
http://eff.org/awards/20030328_pioneer_pr.php

=======================================
[26] New GILC member: HREA
=======================================
The Global Internet Liberty Campaign recently added a new member: Human
Rights Education Associates (HREA). Aside from running the "Huridocs-Tech"
listserv on the use of information and communication technology for human
rights work since 1998 (currently a little over 800 subscribers from 90 or
so countries), HREA has been promoting debate and training around human
rights and the Internet. The organization offers a broad range of distance
learning courses via the Internet for human rights advocates, including two
annual courses on Using the Internet for Human Rights Work (both
Introductory and Advanced). Currently, HREA is assisting HURIDOCS in
implementing a search engine dedicated to human rights information
(HURISEARCH) and the Martus project in providing training in their encrypted
database software for human rights organizations (www.martus.org).

Visit HREA's homepage at
http://www.hrea.org/

=========================================================
     ABOUT THE GILC NEWS ALERT:
=========================================================
The GILC News Alert is the newsletter of the Global Internet Liberty
Campaign, an international coalition of organizations working to protect and
enhance online civil liberties and human rights.  Organizations are invited
to join GILC by contacting us at
gilc@gilc.org.

To alert members about threats to cyber liberties, please contact members
from your country or send a message to the general GILC address.

To submit information about upcoming events, new activist tools and news
stories, contact:

Christopher Chiu
GILC Coordinator
American Civil Liberties Union
125 Broad Street, 17th Floor
New York, New York 10004
USA

Or email:
cchiu@aclu.org

More information about GILC members and news is available at
http://www.gilc.org

You may re-print or redistribute the GILC NEWS ALERT freely.

This edition of the GILC Alert will be found on the World Wide Web under
http://www.gilc.org/alert/alert73.html

To subscribe to the Alert, or to change your subscription options 
(including unsubscribing), please visit
http://www.2rad.net/mailman/listinfo/gilc-announce

========================================================
PUBLICATION OF THIS NEWSLETTER IS MADE POSSIBLE BY A
GRANT FROM THE OPEN SOCIETY INSTITUTE (OSI)
========================================================


========== HURIDOCS-Tech listserv ==========
Send mail intended for the list to <huridocs-tech@hrea.org>.
Archives of the list can be found at:
http://www.hrea.org/lists/huridocs-tech/markup/maillist.php
To subscribe to the list, send a message to <majordomo@hrea.org>,
with the following text in the message: subscribe huridocs-tech
To unsubscribe from the list, send a message to <majordomo@hrea.org>,
with the following text in the message: unsubscribe huridocs-tech
If you have problems (un)subscribing, contact <owner-huridocs-tech@hrea.org>.