Learn from the mistakes of others

sfgate.com
AT&T rewrites rules: Your data isn't yours
David Lazarus
Wednesday, June 21, 2006

AT&T has issued an updated privacy policy that takes effect Friday. The changes are significant because they appear to give the telecom giant more latitude when it comes to sharing customers' personal data with government officials.

The new policy says that AT&T -- not customers -- owns customers' confidential info and can use it "to protect its legitimate business interests, safeguard others, or respond to legal process."

The policy also indicates that AT&T will track the viewing habits of customers of its new video service -- something that cable and satellite providers are prohibited from doing.

Moreover, AT&T (formerly known as SBC) is requiring customers to agree to its updated privacy policy as a condition for service -- a new move that legal experts say will reduce customers' recourse for any future data sharing with government authorities or others.

... read on for more joy.

On the face of the new AT&T "privacy" statement, AT&T 'customers' no longer have any privacy. Nor can they prevent AT&T making commercial use of the customer's personal - or commercial - data.

The statement is scary in ways that make me almost speechless. Almost.

They're playing semantic games, and may well get away with it until US Congress does something. This game is going to be a battle of the deep-pocket special interest groups.

EDIT: UserFriendly chips in ...

sfgate.com
AT&T rewrites rules: Your data isn't yours
David Lazarus
Wednesday, June 21, 2006

AT&T has issued an updated privacy policy that takes effect Friday. The changes are significant because they appear to give the telecom giant more latitude when it comes to sharing customers' personal data with government officials.

The new policy says that AT&T -- not customers -- owns customers' confidential info and can use it "to protect its legitimate business interests, safeguard others, or respond to legal process."

The policy also indicates that AT&T will track the viewing habits of customers of its new video service -- something that cable and satellite providers are prohibited from doing.

Moreover, AT&T (formerly known as SBC) is requiring customers to agree to its updated privacy policy as a condition for service -- a new move that legal experts say will reduce customers' recourse for any future data sharing with government authorities or others.

... read on for more joy.

On the face of the new AT&T "privacy" statement, AT&T 'customers' no longer have any privacy. Nor can they prevent AT&T making commercial use of the customer's personal - or commercial - data.

The statement is scary in ways that make me almost speechless. Almost.

They're playing semantic games, and may well get away with it until US Congress does something. This game is going to be a battle of the deep-pocket special interest groups.

EDIT: UserFriendly chips in ...

Friday, June 02, 2006
DOJ wants ISP help in tracking website visits, internet searches, e-mail traffic
Jaime Jansen at 10:50 AM ET

[JURIST] US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and FBI Director Robert Mueller plan to resume talks on Friday with major internet service providers on retaining customer data on internet activities that would allow them to better combat child pornography and terrorism. An initial meeting [JURIST report] last Friday included American Online, Microsoft, Google, Verizon and Comcast; this week's meeting will include a broader group of representatives from internet companies. The Justice Department [official website] wants to be able to view records that could help them identify which internet users visited specified websites and potentially which users conducted specified searches, as well as determine who exchanged e-mails with whom without disclosing the content of the e-mails.

The issue of government access to detailed internet records is an extremely sensitive one. Earlier this year the Justice Department fought a legal battle [JURIST report] with Google, Inc. [corporate backgrounder] when Google refused to turn over index data or search terms [JURIST report] in response to a Justice Department subpoena [PDF text]. A federal judge ultimately ordered Google [JURIST report] to turn over a limited number of indexed addresses. Justice Department officials have also suggested that retained data could be used to control intellectual property theft and fraud.

The New York Times have more.

The plot is getting thicker. And scope creep is already setting in.

Surveillance all round, and this raises the real probability of post-factum surveillance.

"So, can you explain what you were doing looking at this website, on this day, at this time?"

even scarier,

"We found that you entered the following search into search engine, on this day, at this time. Please explain."

And, like all good government bureaucracies, some nameless Intelligence persona could bring this up years after the fact.

The whole thing is expected to be done by commercial entities, not government ones. The user will be expected to pay directly for this to be conducted regarding their use of the service for which they are paying. Regardless of whether you are suspected of any offence, reasonably or otherwise.

The Internet is for porn. And home invasion. Brought to you by USFedGov™

Smile. Someone [is|will be] watching. Warrants are no object, no objection, and not necessary™


It is becoming increasingly accurate to consider the digital/online world to be very different to anywhere else. A police officer needs to have a reasonable suspicion of illegal activity - or at least some real emergency - before they can enter your home. But, increasingly, that is no longer true if you have an Internet connection in your home.

[While the article refers to developments in the USA, there are signs that our glorious government is heading in the same direction - if they haven't already rushed past already.]

Friday, June 02, 2006
DOJ wants ISP help in tracking website visits, internet searches, e-mail traffic
Jaime Jansen at 10:50 AM ET

[JURIST] US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and FBI Director Robert Mueller plan to resume talks on Friday with major internet service providers on retaining customer data on internet activities that would allow them to better combat child pornography and terrorism. An initial meeting [JURIST report] last Friday included American Online, Microsoft, Google, Verizon and Comcast; this week's meeting will include a broader group of representatives from internet companies. The Justice Department [official website] wants to be able to view records that could help them identify which internet users visited specified websites and potentially which users conducted specified searches, as well as determine who exchanged e-mails with whom without disclosing the content of the e-mails.

The issue of government access to detailed internet records is an extremely sensitive one. Earlier this year the Justice Department fought a legal battle [JURIST report] with Google, Inc. [corporate backgrounder] when Google refused to turn over index data or search terms [JURIST report] in response to a Justice Department subpoena [PDF text]. A federal judge ultimately ordered Google [JURIST report] to turn over a limited number of indexed addresses. Justice Department officials have also suggested that retained data could be used to control intellectual property theft and fraud.

The New York Times have more.

The plot is getting thicker. And scope creep is already setting in.

Surveillance all round, and this raises the real probability of post-factum surveillance.

"So, can you explain what you were doing looking at this website, on this day, at this time?"

even scarier,

"We found that you entered the following search into search engine, on this day, at this time. Please explain."

And, like all good government bureaucracies, some nameless Intelligence persona could bring this up years after the fact.

The whole thing is expected to be done by commercial entities, not government ones. The user will be expected to pay directly for this to be conducted regarding their use of the service for which they are paying. Regardless of whether you are suspected of any offence, reasonably or otherwise.

The Internet is for porn. And home invasion. Brought to you by USFedGov™

Smile. Someone [is|will be] watching. Warrants are no object, no objection, and not necessary™


It is becoming increasingly accurate to consider the digital/online world to be very different to anywhere else. A police officer needs to have a reasonable suspicion of illegal activity - or at least some real emergency - before they can enter your home. But, increasingly, that is no longer true if you have an Internet connection in your home.

[While the article refers to developments in the USA, there are signs that our glorious government is heading in the same direction - if they haven't already rushed past already.]

Greg Sandoval
http://news.com.com/BitTorrent+inks+studio+distribution+deal/2100-1026_3-6070004.html
Tue May 09 2006

BitTorrent, the creator of the file-sharing software that for some has become synonymous with piracy, has struck a landmark distribution deal with a Hollywood studio.

Warner Bros. Entertainment Group has agreed to use BitTorrent's peer-to-peer system to distribute movies and television shows, including "Dukes of Hazzard" and "Babylon 5," beginning this summer, the companies are expected to announce Tuesday.

It has begun.

Greg Sandoval
http://news.com.com/BitTorrent+inks+studio+distribution+deal/2100-1026_3-6070004.html
Tue May 09 2006

BitTorrent, the creator of the file-sharing software that for some has become synonymous with piracy, has struck a landmark distribution deal with a Hollywood studio.

Warner Bros. Entertainment Group has agreed to use BitTorrent's peer-to-peer system to distribute movies and television shows, including "Dukes of Hazzard" and "Babylon 5," beginning this summer, the companies are expected to announce Tuesday.

It has begun.