[governance] Fwd: PRISM - is it about the territorial location of data or its legal ownership

[James S. Tyre]

Oddly, Google's motion in FISC isn't on FISC's public docket, only ours and ACLU's.  But then, FISC isn't used to having a public docket, it isn't exactly real time such as with PACER.  (I've seen Google's motion, I know it exists, it just hasn't been docketed yet.)

http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/courts/fisc/index.html

Declan, did you take that pic of AT&T's Folsom St. facility in the last article you linked?  I think one has to actually see the building in person to realize just how menacing it is, but that is a pretty good shot of it.  '-)

--
James S. Tyre
Law Offices of James S. Tyre
10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512
Culver City, CA 90230-4969
310-839-4114/310-839-4602(fax)
jstyre at jstyre.com
Policy Fellow, Electronic Frontier Foundation
https://www.eff.org


> -----Original Message-----
> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-
> request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Declan McCullagh
> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2013 2:43 PM
> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Ian Peter
> Cc: parminder
> Subject: Re: [governance] Fwd: PRISM - is it about the territorial location of data or
> its legal ownership
> 
> On Monday, June 24, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Ian Peter wrote:
> > I think one point here is whether any of the companies actually challenged in court
> any of the rulings or requests for data, and to my knowledge they did not. This
> suggests that either they were too scared of the government to challenge the rulings,
> or they were in political agreement with them.
> 
> 
> The fact that you're unaware of the companies challenging these requests in court
> should not lead you to -- falsely -- assume they have not.
> 
> I disclosed* last month, pre-NSA spying flap, that Google is litigating two cases
> against the U.S. government, one in NYC and one in SF, over national security
> requests. Google has additionally since squared off against the DOJ before the Foreign
> Intelligence Surveillance Court. Yahoo also mounted** a legal challenge before the
> FISC. Google, Yahoo, Facebook (from memory) have insisted the police get warrants for
> archived email, even though the law does not require police to do so. When DOJ sent
> Google a subpoena for search logs, Google fought it in court. These companies are
> lobbying Congress to enact a law to increase privacy standards, including mobile
> privacy.
> 
> Twitter successfully fought for the ability to notify the Wikileaks crew of an order
> it received, who then fought it in court with the help of EFF and ACLU. Facebook
> fought the state of Virginia. Amazon.com fought the DOJ in court in Wisconsin and
> fought the North Carolina tax collectors in court in Seattle.
> 
> This is the opposite of the approach taken by telecommunications providers including
> AT&T and Verizon.***
> 
> None of this information is difficult to find. Would you like it if someone said: "To
> my knowledge you haven't denied being a supporter of the Ku Klux Klan. This suggests
> you are in political agreement with them?" :)
> 
> -Declan
> 
> ---
> 
> * http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57587005-38/justice-department-tries-to-force-
> google-to-hand-over-user-data/
> ** http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/14/technology/secret-court-ruling-put-tech-
> companies-in-data-bind.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytimes&_r=0
> *** http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57589012-38/nsa-surveillance-retrospective-at-t-
> verizon-never-denied-it/
> 
> 



-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t