[Logan]

*********************************
1) YOUR FREEDOMS & PRIVACY
*********************************


ALL'S WELL, OR ORWELL?
Feds defend demands on companies for users' data, but civil libertarians fear a slippery slope
BY RICHARD J. DALTON JR
January 27, 2006

The Bush administration's demand for information on Internet search queries and a business' sale of cell-phone records highlight the vast amount of data stored by companies, how it can be accessed by the government and private groups, and what little protections Americans may have against the release of personal information.

Concerns about privacy have come to the forefront amid the uproar over the National Security Agency's domestic spying program. But privacy issues extend beyond security.

U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has tried to compel Google to release data on search queries as part of the administration's attempt to defend the constitutionality of the Children Online Protection Act, which courts have blocked from taking effect. The act seeks to prevent children from obtaining *****graphy online.

In November, the Federal Communications Commission forced companies that provide high-speed access or Internet-based telephone services to ensure their systems can accommodate wiretapping. Last month, the government acknowledged the National Security Agency had conducted domestic surveillance without warrants.

"It's clear that the government is making increasing demands for personal information, whether it's through the NSA's domestic spy program or the subpoena to Google," said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, a public interest research center in Washington, D.C. "The big question now is whether the Congress is prepared to establish the necessary legislative safeguards to protect privacy."

Technology companies previously have cooperated with the government on security issues.

In a June 16, 2005, memo from Microsoft chief executive Steve Ballmer to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, Ballmer thanked Chertoff for meeting with executives from the Business Software Alliance, a trade group of hardware and software companies.

"My industry colleagues and I remain eager to work with the Department to support the homeland security mission," Ballmer wrote in the memo, obtained by Newsday under the Freedom of Information Act.

A Microsoft spokesman said the letter related to an annual trip the trade group makes to Washington, D.C., but wouldn't comment on the meeting.

The release of personal information goes beyond the government's requests. Earlier this month, the writer of Americablog.com announced he had bought online for $90 the cell-phone records of 2004 presidential candidate Gen. Wesley Clark, raising a firestorm over the lack of confidentiality of the records.

In Google's case, Gonzales has said he wasn't seeking information from Google that would identify individuals.

Nevertheless, Google, the country's most popular search engine, said it would vigorously fight the government's demand. Nicole Wong, associate general counsel for Google, said the company is not a party to the lawsuit to defend the Children Online Protection Act and the government's demand goes too far. "We had lengthy discussions with them to try to resolve this but were not able to, and we intend to resist their motion vigorously," she said.

Gonzales also sought data from the three other top search engines - Yahoo, MSN and America Online. By getting information from the top four search engines, the government would have a slice of data for about 9 out of every 10 online searches.

Yahoo complied on a limited basis, refusing to disclose personal information, said spokeswoman Mary Osako.

MSN provided aggregated data on search queries that did not include any personally identifiable information, said Adam Sohn, director of global sales and marketing for MSN. The search engine complied "in regards to helping protect children in a way that ensured we also protected the privacy of our customers," he said.

AOL provided an aggregated, anonymous list of search terms, said spokesman Andrew Weinstein said. "We would not comply with a subpoena that requested blanket information about what our users are searching," he said.

Although this case doesn't involve personal data, freely releasing the information opens the door to further requests, Chris Winfield, an expert on search engines, said. "Once you get your foot in the door, then we have 1984," said Winfield, president of 10e20 Llc, a Brooklyn Internet marketing and Web development company.

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) sent a letter to Gonzales on Wednesday requesting details about what information the Department of Justice was seeking and how it would use it, saying the collection of the data posed "the specter of excessive government surveillance."

Dana Perino, a spokeswoman for the White House, said: "The Bush administration fully understands the government's obligation to protect Americans' civil liberties ... And yet the biggest threat to our civil liberties ... is from the terrorists. And so the president has worked ... to protect us from future terrorist attacks while also ensuring that the civil liberties we stand for aren't violated."

The disclosure of the requests from search engines came two months after the FCC demanded that providers of high-speed Internet access and Internet-based telephone services configure their systems to make it easy for the government to wiretap the services.

The FCC push especially concerns librarians, who worry that the changes may allow the government to wiretap the surfing habits of patrons.

"Libraries have information about what kind of information people go after - what books do they check out, what Web sites do they visit, what are they looking at - and that is considered pretty sensitive information," said Rick Weingarten, director of the American Library Association's Office for Information Technology Policy.

This week, the American Library Association sold buttons proclaiming "Radical Militant Librarian" at its midwinter meeting in Chicago.

"We've been called 'radical' and 'militant' by the Justice Department," Weingarten said. "If you look at the librarian in your local library, 'radical' and 'militant' are not exactly words that come to mind. They're very committed to certain values. Those values are at the heart of our democracy."
********continued