It was recently disclosed that curious Verizon employees snooped into then Senator Obama's cellphone records during the recent election. Senator Patrick Leahy has asked the Department of Justice to provide information about investigations and prosecutions under the federal law that prohibits viewing confidential phone records information, related to the reports about Verizon employees improperly accessed President-elect Obama's cell phone records. The employees were dismissed but no criminal investigation was pursued. Unauthorized or illegal access to telephone records through pretexting, domestic surveillance, and now employee curiosity are posing problems for telecommunication privacy.
The First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a New Hampshire law that bans the sale of prescriber-identifiable prescription drug data for marketing purposes. In August, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) and 16 experts in privacy and technology filed a "friend of the court" brief urging the federal appellate court to reverse a lower court ruling that delayed enforcement of the New Hampshire Prescription Confidentiality Act. Privacy experts said the lower court should be reversed because there is a substantial privacy interest in patient data that the lower court failed to consider.
Following an EPIC complaint, a federal court has ordered CyberSpy Software to stop selling malicious computer software. In March, EPIC filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission alleging that the spyware purveyor engages in unfair and deceptive practices by: (1) promoting illegal surveillance; (2) encouraging "Trojan Horse" email attacks; and (3) failing to warn customers of the legal dangers arising from misuse of the software. The federal regulators agreed, and asked the court for a permanent injunction barring sales of CyberSpy's "stalker spyware," over the counter surveillance technology sold for individuals to spy on other individuals. The court entered a temporary restraining order on November 6, 2008. Further litigation is expected before the court rules on the government's request for a permanent ban.
Google announced this week a new web tool that may make it possible to detect flu outbreaks before they might otherwise be reported. Google Flu Trends relies on individual search terms, such as "flu symptoms," provided by Internet users. Google has said that it will only reveal aggregate data, but there are no clear legal or technological privacy safeguards to prevent the disclosure of individual search histories concerning the flu, or related medical concerns, such as "AIDS symptoms," "ritalin," or "Paxil." Privacy and medical groups have urged Google to be more transparent and publish the algorithm on which Flu Trends data is based so that the public can determine whether the privacy safeguards are adequate. At some point aggregate data is identifiable data. Advocacy groups are seeking information on the privacy protections intended to safeguard against abuse or misuse of search information.
Those seeking employment opportunities with the next administration must turnover a great deal of personal information. The 63 question application is intended to facilitate vetting of applicants for top administration jobs, but there are questions about how the information for applicants will be treated. The Presidential Transition organizations are not federal government entities, which means the Privacy Act will not apply. Two statues one passed in 1963, and the last in 2000 deal with Presidential Transitions.
The Department of Homeland Security's Transportation Security Administration issued its final rule on Secure Flight. The rule requires that all air travelers provide their full name, date of birth, and gender to airlines with 72 hours of a flight's departure. However, the agency is asking that if airlines have in their possession additional information on air travelers that they provide it as well. The agency will control the printing of boarding passes for air travelers. Agency rules have the force of law, unless overturned by court decisions or legislative action.
In EPIC v. DOJ, EPIC, the ACLU, and the National Security Archive are seeking government documents regarding the President's warrantless wiretapping program. Today, a federal court ordered the Department of Justice to provide for inspection copies of legal memos authored by government lawyers. The opinions, prepared by the Office of Legal Counsel, provided the legal basis for the President to wiretap US citizens in the United States without court approval. EPIC began the Freedom of Information Act lawsuit in December 2005, after the New York Times first reported the details of the wiretap program.
