Today, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit ruled that a warrant is required to obtain location information generated by the operation of a cell phone or other mobile device. The Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) strongly supports this decision and firmly believes the Fourth Amendment should apply to stored cell phone location information.
Today, a coalition of leading digital rights groups and trade associations released a joint letter opposing a proposal in the Senate to require U.S. tech firms to police the speech of their users and to report any signs of apparent “terrorist activity” to law enforcement. This sweeping mandate covers an undefined category of activities and communications and would likely lead to significant over-reporting by communication service providers. The letter urged senators to remove the “terrorist activity” reporting requirements from the Intelligence Authorization Act (S. 1705).
The Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) has filed an amicus brief calling on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals to set limits on government use of information copied from a computer hard drive seized with a warrant. The joint brief argues that once the government has effectuated a warrant by copying a computer hard drive, it should dispose of the information irrelevant to the crime for which the warrant was issued.
The Internet doesn’t care what countries it sends data through. The Internet just looks for the quickest route, which sometimes means using better-connected networks in countries with completely different surveillance laws. If a user wants to avoid troublesome countries, they could simply set Alibi to skip those locations.
For members of the clergy, how essential is that aspect of their public selves? And who gets to decide that? On Facebook, it’s the company that decides, a policy which has set off renewed public debate in recent weeks after a prominent D.C. Catholic priest – who also is a national columnist – was locked out by Facebook because his clerical title was listed as part of his name on his personal page. The fresh debate about what titles are allowed on Facebook reflects two intense, complex issues of American life in 2015: the place of institutional religion in the public square and the question of identity online. In this case, the two aren’t related but overlap.
Nuala guest writes for GE’s Reports/Ideas: Every time I hear someone use the phrase the “Internet of Things,” I instantly want to remind them that it is still the Internet of people. Yes, it is becoming the Internet of Everything — everything connected, from our cars to our clothing — but regardless of what is connected, the information being collected is still about us. It’s about the way we communicate, eat, move, live and love.