[IP] Sounding the alarm on government mandated data

[Declan McCullagh]

retention

Lauren,

Thanks for your kind remarks about my article for CNET News.com. It's
interesting that you say if we "don't take a stand now, we are likely
to see the wonders of the Net repurposed into shackles that have the
potential to undermine the very basis of our fundamental freedoms."

It does seem bizarre that we had such a public outcry about the
Justice Department trying to obtain some information from Google. But
now that we have the Justice Department proposing something far
broader -- and *actual legislation* afoot in the U.S. Congress, with
a floor vote perhaps next Wednesday -- nobody seems to be paying
attention.

I first wrote about the Justice Department shopping around this
proposal  nearly a year ago:
http://news.com.com/Your+ISP+as+Net+watchdog/2100-1028_3-5748649.html

And then wrote an update a few weeks ago:
http://news.com.com/ISP+snooping+gaining+support/
2100-1028_3-6061187.html

And we've published two articles since then:
http://news.com.com/U.S.+attorney+general+calls+for+reasonable+data
+retention/2100-1030_3-6063185.html
http://news.com.com/Congress+may+consider+mandatory+ISP+snooping/
2100-1028_3-6066608.html

But doing a search for "data retention" coupled with "Gonzales" on
Google News turns up only four hits, three of them our News.com
articles and the fourth a blog entry that links to News.com.

Where's the other coverage and broader concern? My June 2005 article
about the DoJ's statements in a private meeting took digging, true,
but the more recent articles are based on _public statements_ by top
Bush administration officials including Gonzales, Chertoff, and
Mueller, and _actual legislation_ that's published on a House of
Representatives web site.

Perhaps people are waiting until data retention requirements becomes
law before they'll take it seriously?

-Declan



David Farber forwarded Lauren's message:
>Recently here in IP, I commented on Attorny General Gonazales'
>comments
>on data retention, and the alarming slippery slope that I feel this
>represented:
>http://lists.elistx.com/archives/interesting-people/200604/
>msg00134.html
>Now, Declan has noted in an article:
>http://news.com.com/Congress+may+consider+mandatory+ISP+snooping/
>2100-1028_3-6066608.html?tag=st_lh that a Democratic Congresswoman
>is proposing to fast-track a bill or
>ammendment to *require* essentially permanent retention of users'
>Internet activity data (until at *least* one year after the user
>*closes their account*).  For long-term users, this means effectively
>permanent retention.
[...remainder snipped...]


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as eugen at leitl.org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/

----- End forwarded message -----
--
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820            http://www.ativel.com
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

[demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]