Eight major technological firms have written a letter to U.S. President Barack Obama and members of Congress seeking reform of the federal government’s Orwellian spy network.
You know … the one courageously exposed earlier this year by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden.
In the letter the eight companies – AOL, Apple, Facebook, Google, LinkedIn, Microsoft, Twitter and Yahoo! – cited the “urgent need to reform government surveillance practices worldwide.”
“The balance in many countries has tipped too far in favor of the state and away from the rights of the individual — rights that are enshrined in our Constitution,” the letter states. “This undermines the freedoms we all cherish. It’s time for a change.”
Indeed …
Accompanying the letter is a new website – ReformGovernmentSurveillance.com – which outlines five key principles federal officials should keep in mind as they craft reform legislation.
They are as follows …
1) Limiting Governments’ Authority to Collect Users’ Information
Governments should codify sensible limitations on their ability to compel service providers to disclose user data that balance their need for the data in limited circumstances, users’ reasonable privacy interests, and the impact on trust in the Internet. In addition, governments should limit surveillance to specific, known users for lawful purposes, and should not undertake bulk data collection of Internet communications.
2) Oversight and Accountability
Intelligence agencies seeking to collect or compel the production of information should do so under a clear legal framework in which executive powers are subject to strong checks and balances. Reviewing courts should be independent and include an adversarial process, and governments should allow important rulings of law to be made public in a timely manner so that the courts are accountable to an informed citizenry.
3) Transparency About Government Demands
Transparency is essential to a debate over governments’ surveillance powers and the scope of programs that are administered under those powers. Governments should allow companies to publish the number and nature of government demands for user information. In addition, governments should also promptly disclose this data publicly.
4) Respecting the Free Flow of Information
The ability of data to flow or be accessed across borders is essential to a robust 21st century global economy. Governments should permit the transfer of data and should not inhibit access by companies or individuals to lawfully available information that is stored outside of the country. Governments should not require service providers to locate infrastructure within a country’s borders or operate locally.
5) Avoiding Conflicts Among Governments
In order to avoid conflicting laws, there should be a robust, principled, and transparent framework to govern lawful requests for data across jurisdictions, such as improved mutual legal assistance treaty — or “MLAT” — processes. Where the laws of one jurisdiction conflict with the laws of another, it is incumbent upon governments to work together to resolve the conflict.
Obviously the devil is in the details – and its frankly embarrassing a letter like this had to be sent to our government in the first place.
This is America, “the land of the free.” Or at least that’s what it’s supposed to be.
Anyway we hope liberty-minded lawmakers – like U.S. Rep. Justin Amash – take this framework and begin the process of crafting specific legislation pursuant toward its objectives (if they haven’t begun the process of doing so already).
24 comments
Yes, because if legislation is properly drafted only these large Corporations will have access to the information, and we know they will use it responsibly. Nothing to fear from them. They have everyone’s best interest at heart.
You can decide not to use any of their services at any time you desire, unlike government “services”.
You can decide not to use any of their services at any time you desire
——-
Yeah like the internet, roads, phones, watches, wireless headphones, computers, cars, public transportation, water, air, and the environment.
I read Atlas Shrugged too – but then I got properly laid, and I realized that we all have to live together at some point.
It’s not the “internets” friend that is spying on you. Nor does the government monopoly in any of the above justify it’s existence.
Is there an argument you’d like to make?
I’d like to argue a point, that when won, would change something – but since I know better, the unintended theater of the absurd gets more of my attention.
lol…give it some time…what seems absurd now might not be in shorter time than you think when the weight of $200 Trillion plus in unfunded liability come fully down on the powers that be.
I debate in the hope of a solid future, not for immediate change. I understand your viewpoint though.
$200 Trillion plus in unfunded liability
———-
which really means nothing, as Reagan so deftly pointed out.
lol-well if you agree with him I suppose you have nothing to worry about.
:)
Btw, when I say “argument”, I mean that I don’t see you’ve drawn any distinction between my pointing out that William has choices when it comes to a corporate service, versus your strange point that we have no choice when it comes to government services.(I thought that was obvious myself)
Good to know that you were finally properly laid though despite having read “Atlas Shrugged”. I’m sure it translates across all.
The distinction between corporate and government choice is infinitesimal.
Getting laid should be an entitlement.
You point really makes no sense, this is all about the government tracking you through your use of private services. If you don’t use the internet, cell phones, credit cards, and other such services, the government can’t track you. So you have a choice either way. But then again its hard to operate in todays world without a cell phone, internet services or credit cards. My point is, that people have really lost any expectation of privacy in regard to their “on-line” life. Even if the government can’t track you or intercept your calls easily, the corporation you buy the service through can and they are just as likely, if not more likely, to misuse that information than the government. How do you know a Verizon employee is not monitoring your calls?
No doubt, but let us remember that it’s gov’t driving the tracking and using corporations in a fascist model.
So my point being is that if gov’t wasn’t mandating these corporations turn over their information on you. Some market keeping you anonymous and you have choices. They are not well known and no one knows if they can keep you safe…but again…that’s gov’ts fault…not theirs(see Lavabit).
“So my point being is that if gov’t wasn’t mandating these corporations
turn over their information on you. Some market keeping you anonymous
and you have choices.”
What a mess on my part.
I mean to say that if gov’t wasn’t mandating the tracking you might have more choices, but there are choices out there.
As the proponents of the patriot act were wont to say: “What do you have to hide?”
Two wrongs always make a right.
I believe the founding fathers were sympathetic to bootleggers and scoundrels, and wanted criminals to get away with anything they were clever enough to cover up – thinking that anything truly harmful would leave a large trail of blood, and that most laws would be a trivial nuisance, intended only to mollify the nosy old bats in the neighborhood.
No disagreement here. It’s pretty hard to “get away” with anything though when they know what time you poo and what your poo consists of.
I’m cringing in the wake of Republican comments on the point at which life begins – I fully expect the “smaller government” people to establish sanitary napkin straining stations to rescue zombied zygotes before they are ignominiously sent into the sewers to float into obscurity with fecal matter and discarded bell pepper seeds…
…weekly blood checks and pregnancy tattoos, customs checks for pregnancy on the way out, and proof of pregnancy or baby on the way back in…
I get the willies thinking about how much piss is examined gleefully by Reagan’s Corporate Pee Wees.
The gov’t will do what any good debater does on a topic it can’t win on, ignore it.
If the Federal Cockroaches ever manage to get Snowden in an US Courtroom, it will be interesting to see which side, Prosecution or Defense, is the first to use this letter for their benefit
My money is on the Defense
Don’t get me wrong, that’s nice and everything, but how many of those companies have already opened up backdoors for various government entities as it is?
To a certain extent, you could also say that these companies are doing this because it hurts them in markets outside of the US. Other countries don’t like the notion that they may be buying stuff with backdoors built into them. I want to say this has been the case with a few companies but I don’t have the link on hand.
This letter is vague enough to be completely ineffectual. Privacy activists are outraged, but I sense no outrage from these billion dollar companies who willingly gave the government the backdoor. They failed to mention any wrongdoing by the government, which leads me to believe they see nothing wrong with their spying and data collection.
If they can’t point to any one thing and say, “Stop doing this, our customers don’t like it,” then they don’t want anything to really change.
This is just public relations. The weak minded will be appeased and be lulled back to peaceful slumber. Operations will continue as normal. Big Brother wins.
This is hilarious.
A bunch of companies that collect far more in-depth, wide ranging personal data on the people who visit their sites so that they can SELL ADVERTISING are concerned about what the government might do to identify terrorists…pot meet kettle.
‘Last time I picked up my telephone,it blew up.This is not only a scandal,but a tragedy,especially now that I have just the one hand.I want my hand back,evil Amerikan gubmint!