EFF's topics - tribe.net

Bloomberg advocates worker DNA database

Tedster — Fri, 26 May 2006 03:01:01 GMT

NYC Mayor Advocates U.S. Worker Database
Thursday, May 25 2006 @ 07:21 PM PDT
Contributed by: Admin

Republican Mayor Michael Bloomberg thrust himself into the national immigration debate Wednesday, advocating a plan that would establish a DNA or fingerprint database to track and verify all legal U.S. workers.

NYC Mayor Advocates U.S. Worker Database

May 24 6:49 PM US/Eastern

By SARA KUGLER
Associated Press Writer

NEW YORK

Republican Mayor Michael Bloomberg thrust himself into the national immigration debate Wednesday, advocating a plan that would establish a DNA or fingerprint database to track and verify all legal U.S. workers.

The mayor also said elements of the legislation moving through Congress are ridiculous and said lawmakers who want to deport all illegal immigrants are living in a "fantasy."

In an editorial for The Wall Street Journal and two nationally televised interviews, the mayor reiterated his long-standing belief that the 12 million undocumented immigrants in the United States should be given the opportunity for citizenship, saying that deporting them is impossible and would devastate the economy.

Aides said Bloomberg believes his views are relevant because he has a rare perspective as a former businessman who ran a company for two decades before he became mayor, in charge of enforcing the laws in a city with an estimated half-million illegal immigrants. They said that the editorial was his idea and that CNN and Fox News approached him to discuss his views on the air.

In the article and on air, Bloomberg slammed lawmakers who want to deport all illegal immigrants, saying on Fox News that "they are living in a fantasy world."

Asked in that interview whether his opinions put him at odds with his political party, the mayor, a former Democrat, shot back: "With which party?

"I'm not a partisan guy," Bloomberg said. "I am a mayor who has to deal with 500,000 people who are integral to our economy but are undocumented."

Bloomberg compared his proposed federal identification database to the Social Security card, insisting that such a system would not violate citizens' privacy and was not a civil liberties issue.

"You don't have to work _ but if you want to work for a company you have to have a Social Security card," he said. "The difference is, in the day and age when everybody's got a PC on their desk with Photoshop that can replicate anything, it's become a joke."

The mayor said DNA and fingerprint technology could be used to create a worker ID database that will "uniquely identify the person" applying for a job, ensuring that cards are not illegally transferred or forged.

Donna Lieberman, director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, said a DNA or fingerprint database "doesn't sound like the free society we think we're living in."

"It will inevitably be used not just by employers but by law enforcement, government agencies, schools and all over the private sector," she said.

0 comments

http://www.infoshop.org/inews/article.php?story=20060525192154931

posted in EFF - 0 replies

EFF vs. AT&T updates / audio

podp — Thu, 18 May 2006 20:09:30 GMT

"EFF Can Use Critical AT&T Documents in Surveillance Lawsuit
A federal judge in San Francisco ruled today that the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) can use critical evidence in its class-action lawsuit against AT&T. However, U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker said the evidence—three documents that AT&T alleges are proprietary and contain the company's trade secrets—will be kept under seal for now. EFF's suit accuses AT&T of illegally handing over its customers' telephone and Internet records and communications to the National Security Agency (NSA)."

from
eff.org

+

fwd>

ORAL ARGUMENTS WERE HEARD IN SF FEDERAL COURT TODAY ( yesterday 5.17.06 ) TO DISMISS EFF'S SUIT AGAINST AT&T FOR ASSISTING THE NSA IN WARANTLESS WIRETAPPING OF MILLIONS OF AT&T CUSTOMERS. THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION IS ASKING FOR THE COURTS TO DISMISS THE LAWSUIT SAYING EVIDENCE USED COULD HARM NATIONAL SECURITY INTERESTS.

audio files posted here:

http://www.indybay.org/news/2006/05/1823927.php

posted in EFF - 3 replies

Feds Drop Bomb on EFF Lawsuit

Tedster — Sun, 30 Apr 2006 03:14:59 GMT

Feds Drop Bomb on EFF Lawsuit

The federal government intends to invoke the rarely used "State Secrets Privilege" -- the legal equivalent of a nuclear bomb -- in the Electronic Frontier Foundation's class action lawsuit against AT&T that alleges the telecom collaborated with the government's secret spying on American citizens.

The State Secrets Privilege is a vestige from English common law that lets the executive branch step into a civil lawsuit and have it dismissed if the case might reveal information that puts national security at risk.

Today's assertion severely darkens the prospects of the EFF's lawsuit, which the organization had hoped would shine light on the extent of the Bush Administration's admitted warrantless spying on Americans.

The government is not admitting, however, that AT&T aided the National Security Agency in spying on American's phone calls and internet communications.

"[T]he fact that the United States will assert the state secrets privilege should
not be construed as a confirmation or denial of any of Plaintiffs¿ allegations, either about AT&T or the alleged surveillance activities," the filing reads. "When allegations are made about purported classified government activities or relationships, regardless of whether those allegations are accurate, the existence or non-existence of the activity or relationship is potentially a state secret."

The Justice Department has not formally invoked the privilege yet.

Today's notice was intended to inform Northern California US District Court Judge Vaughn Walker that the government was intending to assert the privilege in order to seek dismissal of the case.

The complete paperwork justifying the government's decision will be filed by May 12.

http://wiredblogs.tripod.com/27BStroke6/index.blog?entry_id=1468765

posted in EFF - 9 replies

Congress may clamp down on MySpace

Tedster — Fri, 12 May 2006 23:22:17 GMT

As far Ias I am concerned, porn is often a red herring for other forms of censership

Congress may clamp down on MySpace
Friday, May 12 2006 @ 07:40 AM PDT
Contributed by: Admin

New legislation from Congress would block access to social-networking sites like MySpace and Facebook in schools and libraries, including instant-messaging services.

Congress may clamp down on MySpace

By Stokely Baksh
UPI Technology Correspondent
May. 11, 2006 at 1:39PM

New legislation from Congress would block access to social-networking sites like MySpace and Facebook in schools and libraries, including instant-messaging services.

The bill known as the "The Deleting Online Predators Act" introduced by Rep. Michael G. Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., aims at protecting minors from online child predators.

According to the bill, it "prohibits access to commercial social networking Web sites or chat rooms through which minors" can access obscene or indecent material, be subject to unlawful sexual advances or repeated offensive comments of a sexual nature from adults, or access harmful information.

The bill terms a social-network Web site as one that allows users to create Web pages or profiles about themselves as well as offers communications including a forum, chat room, e-mail or instant messenger, while a chat room is termed a site that allows multiple users to communicate in real time via text.

"Sites like MySpace and Facebook have opened the door to a new online community of social networks between friends, students and colleagues," Fitzpatrick said. "However, this new technology has become a feeding ground for child predators that use these sites as just another way to do our children harm."

Specifically, it would require schools and libraries to implement security systems to prevent students from being exposed to obscene and objectionable material, according to Fitzpatrick.

It would strengthen existing Web-surfing filters for indecency or obscenity.

Moreover, it also mandates that a Web site be created by the Federal Trade Commission to educate adults about the dangers of such online child predators and at the same time provide information on how social-networking sites are used and what should not be included in a user's profile.

"As the father of six children, I hear about these Web sites on a daily basis," Fitzpatrick said. "However, the majority of these networking sites lack proper controls to protect their younger users. Also, many parents lack the resources to protect their children from online predators. My legislation seeks to change that."

While some schools have already banned access to MySpace, which has some 72 million users, a raging Internet battle has been brewing between children, parents, law enforcement, Internet-freedom proponents and Congress over different issues in the debate, such as the legality of a ban vs. educating youths vs. stricter protections against online child predators.

Still, social-networking sites are cleaning up.

In March MySpace announced it had removed some 200,000 "objectionable" profiles from its network to address fears of Internet security.

The site removed profiles contained either hate speech or risqu? content as one way to deal with the problem.

Maintaining a reputation for appropriate content isn't a bad thing either, making sites more attractive to advertisers who are already flocking to sites like MySpace because of their growing user base.

10 comments

http://www.infoshop.org/inews/article.php?story=20060512074012738

posted in EFF - 0 replies

‘Pay to play’ Internet? Providers say it should be

bnblue — Tue, 13 Dec 2005 15:26:37 GMT

The article below was forwarded to me by a friend, from our local paper. Interesting article. I think it sounds like a horrible idea to me, for a variety of reasons, especially considering we pay for the wires when we pay our phone and DSL/cable internet bills. Also smaller websites, bloggers, personal websites, etc would be hurt by this policy, in my opinion.

------------------------------------

‘Pay to play’ Internet? Providers say it should be
Congress debating whether companies ought to be able to buy premium performance

Tuesday, December 13, 2005

Marilyn Geewax
COX NEWS SERVICE

WASHINGTON — Internet users have grown accustomed to wandering independently in cyberspace, free from outside influence over the online destinations they choose.

But now, telephone and cable companies are arguing that they should be able to let some Internet sites work better than others, making them more attractive to Web surfers.

For example, if Google paid for the right, an Internet provider would allow the search engine to return results more quickly than any other. If the Walt Disney Co. ponied up, its ondemand movies would download for home viewing far faster than competitors’ offerings.

The notion is sparking a fight, with companies that have flourished online asking Congress to guarantee that providers of highspeed Internet service will preserve a world of "network neutrality."

They want lawmakers to approve rules requiring broadband providers to give equal access to all Web sites and services, whether they involve voice, video or data.

"This is huge — the future of the Internet is at stake," said Jonathan Rintels, head of the Center for Creative Voices in Media, an advocacy group for writers, producers, directors and other artists. "This would lead to a closed, proprietary Internet."

Phone and cable companies argue that heavy-handed government rules would discourage them from building the infrastructure needed for advanced online services. They say they are making multibillion-dollar investments in wires and equipment and ought to be free to reap big rewards for taking big risks.

The companies say that charging online- content providers for highquality performance is only fair.

In Business Week last month, Edward Whitacre, chief executive of AT&T, formerly known as SBC Communications, caused a stir by stating his company’s case bluntly: "For a Google or a Yahoo or a Vonage or anybody to expect to use these pipes for free is nuts."

William Smith, chief technology officer for BellSouth, recently defended his company’s desire to "prioritize" services, depending upon which content providers are affiliated with BellSouth.

He said BellSouth would not block access to Web content or services but would use its technology to identify which "packets" of content should be allowed to move more quickly to customers.

He said all sorts of companies routinely charge for higherquality performance. "If I go to the airport, I can buy a coach standby ticket or a first-class ticket," he said.

Braden Cox, technology counsel for the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a publicpolicy group that supports freemarket approaches, agrees with BellSouth.

Consumers might "fear that the people who own the pipes will manage the content too," he said. "That would be a legitimate concern if there were only one pipe." But because consumers now have several broadband choices, including DSL, cable and satellite, they would flee from any company that used heavy-handed policies to steer them to particular sites and services, he said.

Opponents are outraged at the thought of giving Internet providers the power to influence Web users’ choices.

Computer networking pioneer Vinton Cerf, revered by many as the "father of the Internet," last month asked members of a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee to rethink any legislation that would not contain tough neutrality provisions.

"This bill would do great damage to the Internet as we know it," Cerf, now a vice president at Google Inc., said in a letter. "Telephone companies cannot tell consumers who they can call; network operators should not dictate what people can do on line."

This position is backed by independent Internet service providers, such as Atlanta-based EarthLink Inc.

During a House hearing last month, Christopher Putala, executive vice president of public policy for EarthLink, called for stringent neutrality rules that would ensure consumers’ access to any lawful content or applications, including video and phone services, while prohibiting broadband providers from favoring affiliated sites.

"The threat of Internet discrimination is a real and present danger to consumers," he said.

The House subcommittee had hoped to address the issue this week during a vote on telecommunications overhaul legislation. But because of lastminute wrangling among committee members, no action was scheduled.

In Congress, positions on the issue have split largely along party lines, with Democrats favoring Internet neutrality. Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., said the Internet so far has been "a wonderfully chaotic, open, worldwide network, a platform for innovation and an economic engine for the country."

In the Senate, Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, has not yet introduced legislation, but he has scheduled a "net neutrality" hearing for Feb. 7.

posted in EFF - 1 reply

Censored

Tedster — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 05:47:48 GMT

Please repost.

Please use the censored avatar to make it clear that you do not approve Tribes new censorship policy.

posted in EFF - 2 replies

eek! no EFF.org ?

alexjb — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 23:45:42 GMT

so i wanted to check something out about the EFF site. tried it in my browser, no luck (domain not found); i then tried it from a shell account with a different DNS server. also not found!

there's still a WHOIS listing for it, and they own the domain until 2006, so i'm confused.

does anyone know something that i don't? they're still around, aren't they?

posted in EFF - 1 reply

What is a Standard?

Sat, 22 Jan 2005 05:24:34 GMT

Microsoft has just invented and is going to attempt to patent what they say is a new process on how “Standard” hardware is defined and the process it may soon own because well they own 99% of the desktop market and are in spite of the anti trust ruling attempting a patent that may if granted empower them to require all computer related hardware even if not compatible to pay them a fee.

All of there work is based upon prior art and not how an industry standard is established I would encourage you to email the patent office and point out that a the inch, or any increment if it has no patent while the code may be fancy it is not new nor should any standard be granted upon a process to set a Standard or a process. Clearly the patent system is being abused by my corporations in IT not with true research and innovation, a standard is not a innovation even if it “software” based upon well know facts do you want MS to invent software to tell you that 120v is 120v and Ohm an Ohm that is what this patent is about!

Link Facts:

Story: http://news.com.com/Will+that+game+work+on+your+PC/2100-1047_3-5542017.html (ok let’s get the gamers they are young?) Where are the anti trust people?

Actual Patent Application: http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=4&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=Xbox&OS=Xbox&RS=Xbox

^ Oh it is a rating system for gaming not it is for all computer standards! Where are the Anti Trust people here?

Last is David Becker (david.becker@cnet.com <david.becker@cnet.com) and Cnet promoting thus application as good thing not in an objective review? Guess having a few billion to have owners of places like Cnet suck up to you has an advantage...and where are the anti trust regulators on this one? Truth was not invited to the latest Microsoft business summit!

Email the patent office this applications should be tossed out and not considered!

posted in EFF - 0 replies

No Posts on the Grokster Win?

Sun, 29 Aug 2004 06:24:20 GMT

Hwo much activity does this Tribe get?

posted in EFF - 0 replies

Protecting your TV...from you

Jesse — Thu, 04 Mar 2004 22:24:43 GMT

Good article on the Advanced Television Systems Committee Flag;
http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/wo_garfinkel030304.asp

posted in EFF - 0 replies

EFFector, Vol. 17, No. 1 January 20, 2004

sfslim — Wed, 21 Jan 2004 05:30:03 GMT

EFFector Vol. 17, No. 1 January 20, 2004 donna@eff.org

A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424
In the 276th Issue of EFFector:

* EFF Action Alert: Airlines and Government Violate Your Privacy Again:
Call for Hearings Now!
* Update on CAPPS II: What's Next?
* Guest Op-ed: "Your Finances, Your Liberties"
* Nominate a Pioneer for EFF's 2004 Pioneer Awards!
* Deep Links (11): SCO Sues Novell for Slander
* EFF Court Docket: 02.03.04 - MGM v. Grokster; 02.09.04 - OPG v.
Diebold
* Staff Calendar: 01.22.04 - Fred von Lohmann speaks at "Washington
in the West" Conference, Long Beach, CA.; 01.25.04 - Gwen Hinze
speaks on file-sharing, Berkeley, CA.; 01.26.04 - Lee Tien
speaks on privacy, Battle Creek, MI
* Administrivia

For more information on EFF activities & alerts:
<http://www.eff.org/>

To join EFF or make an additional donation:
<https://secure.eff.org/>

EFF is a member-supported nonprofit. Please sign up as a member today!

: . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : .

* Airlines and Government Violate Your Privacy Again

Call for Hearings Now!

Only four months ago, the news broke that JetBlue secretly handed
over personal data on millions of air travelers to a government
contractor. Now, Northwest Airlines has admitted to doing the
very same thing, violating the privacy of more than ten million
people by secretly providing NASA with passenger records that
include names, addresses, itineraries, credit card information
and more. But the bad news doesn't stop there: last week, the
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) announced plans
for "live testing" and implementation of CAPPS II, a
passenger-profiling system that would make privacy violations of
this kind routine for air travel. To top it off, TSA has
threatened to issue a government "security directive" forcing
the airlines to use their passengers as guinea pigs for the
system.

Enough is enough. Congress must halt all current CAPPS II
testing and hold public hearings to find out who is providing
American travelers' personal data to the government and
exactly what the information is being used for. Send this
letter and urge Congress to get the answers now!

Make your voice heard with the EFF Action Center:
<http://action.eff.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=2854>

Join EFF Today:
<https://secure.eff.org/>

Washington Post story on Northwest and NASA:
<http://www.eff.org/cgi/tiny?urlID=90>
(Registration unfortunately required.)

EPIC press release and FOIA documents:
<http://www.epic.org/privacy/airtravel/nasa/pr1.18.04.html>

Discussion of Northwest Scandal and EU at Edward
Hasbrouck's weblog,"The Practical Nomad":
<http://hasbrouck.org/blog/archives/000114.html>

EFF's CAPPS II backgrounder:
<http://www.eff.org/Privacy/cappsii/>

: . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : .

* Update on CAPPS II: What's Next?

As noted in the Action Alert above, the Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) last week confirmed plans to test and
implement CAPPS II, a controversial passenger-profiling system
that uses information in government and commercial databases
to "tag" each passenger with a color-coded score indicating the
level of security risk that he or she appears to pose.

EFF strongly opposes CAPPS II and is working to stop both
testing and implementation. In addition to sounding the call
for a Congressional investigation and hearings on CAPPS II, we
will be monitoring developments in the next few months that
may prove pivotal to the program's future:

--TSA will shortly issue its third Privacy Act notice
on CAPPS II.

--The General Accounting Office (GAO) is scheduled to report on
the privacy impacts of CAPPS II on February 15, as required by
Section 519 of H.R. 2555, Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) Appropriations Act of 2004, Public Law 108-90.

--The DHS Under Secretary for Border and Transportation Security
is expected to "certify" that CAPPS II has adequate privacy
protections under Section 607 of H.R. 2115, Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Act of 2004, Public Law
108-176. The GAO is scheduled to report (again) on the privacy
impacts of CAPPS II within 90 days of this "certification."
Unfortunately, there is no deadline for the "certification," so
we do not know when it will be be issued.

--Finally, the DHS is also scheduled to produce its own privacy
impact assessment of CAPPS II around March 12, as required by
Section 608 of the FAA Reauthorization Act.

"The JetBlue and Northwest scandals have given us a glimpse of
what the future would be like with CAPPS II in place," said EFF
Attorney and Equal Justice Works/ Bruce J. Ennis Fellow Kevin
Bankston. "Millions of people have already been stripped of
their privacy without even knowing it. If we don't stop CAPPS II
now, that's only the beginning."

: . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : .

* Guest Op-ed: "Your Bank Account, Your Liberties"

By George Paine

(Note: this op-ed was previously published in a longer form
on January 2 at Warblogging.com>)

On New Year's Eve, my debit and ATM card stopped functioning. When
I got in touch with my bank the following Saturday I was told that
it was disabled due to "possible fraud" and that I would have to
visit the bank personally to review my account history and
certify that no fraud occurred before my card could be reactivated.

I went to the bank that day and met with my banker, who greeted
me by name as I arrived. He pulled up my account on his computer
and scrolled through my financial history for the past several
months. Together we set out to find anything suspicious. As the
pages - the days - rolled by on-screen, I realized that these
transactions brought back memories.

I mentioned this to him and he gave me a knowing smile. He began
to extrapolate details of my life from the transactions. "So,
here, on December 13th, you got a cup of coffee with a friend.
Then you guys got some sushi...Is that place good? You took in a
show. Had a couple of drinks afterward..."

He was right. That was exactly what I'd done that day. Eventually
we got to my Christmas purchases. He asked if someone had liked
a particular gift. I said that she did. He gave me a friendly
wink.

It struck me then that this man knows where I eat, where I get my
coffee, when and where I drink, when and where I travel. He knows
where I buy books. He knows what political campaigns I've
contributed to, and how much.

After we ruled out fraud, he reactivated my ATM card and I thanked
him for the service. It was then that I noticed a small sign on his
desk, an advertisement from a banking services company. It was
designed to appear as patriotic as possible, right down to the
American flag in the background. It read "USA PATRIOT
Act compliance by..."

While I don't remember the name of the company that provided the
advertisement to my banker, a quick Google search reveals many such
companies. One of them is Aquilan, which offers a product called
Aquilan Patriot Manager (APM). The APM tagline: "Know Your
Customers. 'Red Flag' Suspicious Activity. Prevent Money
Laundering."

My time with the banker was innocuous. But the PATRIOT Act
requires banks to report any "suspicious activity" to the
government. According to the Aquilan website, the complexity of
the banking business these days makes correctly identifying
such activity "nearly impossible," so banks use software like
APM to make the impossible possible. But is it?

APM probably works much the same way as the fraud detection
software that prevented me from accessing my own bank account.
This means that it's just as likely to be flawed, just as likely
to yield false positives. And just as likely to bring the FBI to
my door as the fraud detection software was to bring me to
the bank.

On December 13th, President Bush signed into law the "Intelligence
Authorization Act for FY 2004." This bill contains a section
that expands the FBI's power to access our bank records, and our
interactions with most other businesses, without first obtaining
permission from a judge.

No longer can a judge say, "You're on a fishing expedition.
You can't see George Paine's banking information."

If this doesn't concern you, it should. Think back to the skeleton
or two in your closet. Think about all the information that your
bank records share about you.

The Fourth Amendment is written as it is for a reason - to prevent
the abuse of power. The Constitution's framers understood that
"power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

If you don't take the threat of abuse seriously, you need look no
further than the FBI itself. Take, for example, COINTELPRO, a
program conceived "to neutralize political dissidents" by
"discrediting and publicly destroying" them.

Or consider the DEA's Kevin Tamez, Associate Special Agent in
Charge of the New York office. On December 15th, Tamez was
indicted for "illegally obtaining information from law enforcement
[databases]" and using it to conduct his own private
investigations.

It isn't wise to imagine that your status as a loyal and
law-abiding citizen will protect you from having your personal
records used against you. Dr. Martin Luther King was a loyal
American citizen, yet was a target of COINTELPRO.

When the rubber hits the road things like loyalty and good
citizenship don't matter. What matters is whether the people
in power have been given the tools to abuse that power.
Under PATRIOT and the Intelligence Authorization Act for FY
2004, they have them.

-end-

George Paine is the founder of Warblogging.com, a website
"providing another voice in the chorus of Americans calling for a
balanced and reasonable foreign policy and a domestic policy
that respects the United States Constitution and the rule of
law." For further details, see
<http://www.warblogging.com/about/>.

: . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : .

* Nominate a Pioneer for EFF's 2004 Pioneer Awards

EFF established the Pioneer Awards to recognize leaders on the
electronic frontier who are extending freedom and innovation
in the realm of information technology. This is your opportunity
to nominate a deserving individual or group to receive a Pioneer
Award for 2004.

The International Pioneer Awards nominations are open both to
individuals and organizations from any country.

All nominations are reviewed by a panel of judges chosen for
their knowledge of the technical, legal, and social issues
associated with information technology.

This year's award ceremony will be held in Berkeley, California,
in conjunction with the Computers, Freedom and Privacy conference
(CFP), which takes place in mid-April.

How to Nominate Someone for a 2004 Pioneer Award:

You may send as many nominations as you wish, but please use one
email per nomination. Please submit your entries via email to
pioneer@eff.org

We will accept nominations until February 1, 2004.

Simply tell us:

1. The name of the nominee,
2. the phone number or email address at which the nominee can
be reached, and, most importantly,
3. why you feel the nominee deserves the award.

For more details, see our Pioneer Awards website:
<http://www.eff.org/awards/pioneer/>

: . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : .

* Deep Links
Deep Links features noteworthy news items from around the Internet.

~ SCO Sues Novell for Slander
For falsely claiming copyright in - you guessed it - something
else SCO thinks it owns:
<http://www.eff.org/cgi/tiny?urlID=94>
(InfoWorld)

~ UK Teens Get Censorship on the Go
British kids won't be viewing naughty images on their mobile
phones anymore:
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3409081.stm>

~ It's Not Over Until...
John Ashcroft sings:
<http://www.eff.org/cgi/tiny?urlID=95>
(CNN)

~ Can You Track Me Now?
A new network software "engine" allows you to control who can
locate you through your cell phone:
<http://www.eff.org/cgi/tiny?urlID=91>
(Associated Press)

~ DRM Technology Year in Review
How code affected your rights in 2003:
<http://www.drmwatch.com/drmtech/article.php/3294391>

~ Microsoft v. MikeRoweSoft.com
Microsoft admits that it takes itself "too seriously" and
backs off (a bit) from trademark claims against 17 year-old
Mike Rowe:
<http://www.eff.org/cgi/tiny?urlID=96>
(ZDNet)

~ The Sound of Compromise
Digital music remains a tough nut to crack:
<http://www.eff.org/cgi/tiny?urlID=92>
(Washington Post; registration unfortunately required.)

~ Feds Solicit Input on Punishments for Spammers
Sorry guys - the Eighth Amendment still applies:
<http://www.ussc.gov/FEDREG/fedr0104.htm>

~ DirecTV Dragnet Grows Wider
The satellite giant has now threatened more than a 100,000
people with legal action for simply purchasing multi-purpose
smart card technology:
<http://www.eff.org/cgi/tiny?urlID=93>
(Houston Chronicle; registration unfortunately required.)

~ History @ 99 Cents Per Download
Smithsonian Folkways will use Peppercoin micropayments to offer
its extensive catalogue of American folk music at a familiar 99
cents a pop:
<http://www.mi2n.com/press.php3?press_nb=61329>

~ Grand Theft Auto: Free Speech Edition
After a recent row over video game violence, one Florida city
is trying to pass an ordinance to control pixellated
expression:
<http://www.ecommercetimes.com/perl/story/32527.html>
<http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,61958,00.html>

: . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : .

* EFF Court Docket

~ February 3 -
MGM v. Grokster
U.S. Court of Appeals
Pasadena, CA.
9:00 a.m.

~ February 9
OPG v. Diebold
U.S. District Court, Northern California
280 South 1st street
San Jose, CA.
Courtroom 3
9:00 a.m.

: . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : .

* Staff Calendar
For a complete listing of EFF speaking engagements (with
locations and times), please visit:
<http://www.eff.org/calendar/>

~ January 22-
Fred von Lohmann speaks at "Washington in the West" Conference
Long Beach, CA.
- 11:40 a.m. - 12:40 p.m.
<http://laipla.org/>

~ January 25-
Gwen Hinze speaks on file-sharing, Haas School of Business,
University of California
Berkeley, CA.
12:00 p.m. - 1:00 p.m.

~ January 26-
Lee Tien speaks on privacy, presenting to W.K. Kellogg
Foundation
Battle Creek, MI
10:00 a.m. - 11:00 a.m.

. : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : .

* Administrivia

EFFector is published by:

The Electronic Frontier Foundation
454 Shotwell Street
San Francisco CA 94110-1914 USA
+1 415 436 9333 (voice)
+1 415 436 9993 (fax)
http://www.eff.org/

Editor:
Donna Wentworth, Web Writer/Activist
donna@eff.org

To Join EFF online, or make an additional donation, go to:
<https://secure.eff.org/>

Membership & donation queries:
membership@eff.org

General EFF, legal, policy or online resources queries:
ask@eff.org

Reproduction of this publication in electronic media is
encouraged. Signed articles do not necessarily represent the
views of EFF. To reproduce signed articles individually, please
contact the authors for their express permission. Press releases
and EFF announcements & articles may be reproduced individually
at will.

To change your address or other information, please visit:
<http://action.eff.org/subscribe/>

If you have already subscribed to the EFF Action Center, please
visit:
<http://action.eff.org/action/login.asp>

To unsubscribe from the EFFector mailing list, send an email to
alerts@action.eff.org with the word "Remove" in the subject.

(Please ask donna@eff.org to manually remove you from the list if
this does not work for some reason.)

Back issues are available at:
<http://www.eff.org/effector>

You can also get the latest issue of EFFector via the Web at:
<http://www.eff.org/effector/current.html>

++++++++++++++++++++++++
You received this message because eff@fluxdesign.com is a member
of the mailing list originating from alerts@action.eff.org. To
unsubscribe from all mailing lists originating from
alerts@action.eff.org, send an email from eff@fluxdesign.com to
alerts@action.eff.org with 'Remove' as the only text in the subject
line.

posted in EFF - 0 replies