Today's Approval of PCLOB Nominations a Long-Overdue Victory for Privacy and the Rule of Law</h1> <article> <h1>Today's Approval of PCLOB Nominations a Long-Overdue Victory for Privacy and the Rule of Law</h1> <p>Berin Szoka — Thu, 17 May 2012 18:53:36 +0000</p> <div class="field field-type-date field-field-publication-date"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <span class="date-display-single">May 17, 2012</span> </div> </div> </div> <p>The Senate Judiciary Committee approved five nominations to the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) today. The following statement can be attributed to <a href="http://techfreedom.org/people/berin-szoka">Berin Szoka</a>, President of TechFreedom:</p><p style="padding-left: 30px;">The PCLOB is a board that even the staunchest critic of government bloat should love. This isn't another unnecessary regulatory agency, but an essential tool for overseeing how the Federal government collects and uses information about Americans. That's why a dozen leading conservatives and libertarians signed <a href="http://constitutionproject.org/pdf/5912_conservativesltrtosenjudiciary_pclob.pdf">a letter</a> last week supporting the PCLOB.</p><p style="padding-left: 30px;">A key recommendation of the 9/11 Commission, the PCLOB was first established in 2004, but the Senate never filled the Board. So today's vote is a long-overdue victory for privacy and the rule of law.</p><p style="padding-left: 30px;">The PCLOB is more necessary than ever as Congress careens towards passing cybersecurity legislation that, while well-intentioned, could allow radical new intrusions by government into our private communications without traditional safeguards. Even if such legislation is amended as TechFreedom and others <a href="http://constitutionproject.org/pdf/5912_conservativesltrtosenjudiciary_pclob.pdf">have urged</a>, the PCLOB will be needed to ensure those added safeguards are actually enforced. A budget of one or two million dollars a year is a small price to pay to help protect us from a growing government. The PCLOB can't do this alone, but it won't happen at all without the Board.</p> <p> Szoka is available for comment at <a href="mailto:media@techfreedom.org">media@techfreedom.org</a>.</p><p> TechFreedom has recently joined on <a href="http://techfreedom.org/sites/default/files/Free%20Market%20Coalition%20Letter%20on%20CISPA_1.pdf">three</a> <a href="https://www.cdt.org/files/pdfs/SecureIT_Coalition_Letter.pdf">separate</a> <a href="http://www.aclu.org/files/assets/coalition_letter_re_deep_concerns_about_s__2105_-_5_10_12.pdf">coalition</a> letters on the issue of cybersecurity. To learn more about the PCLOB, read the <a href="http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34385.pdf">Congressional Research Service Report</a>. </p> </article> <article> <h1>Toward a Greater Understanding of Internet Activism through Public Choice, Economics</h1> <p>Berin Szoka — Mon, 07 May 2012 22:00:23 +0000</p> <div class="field field-type-date field-field-publication-date"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <span class="date-display-single">May 7, 2012</span> </div> </div> </div> <p> </p><p>In the <a href="http://www.cato-unbound.org/2012/05/07/berin-szoka/toward-a-greater-understanding-of-internet-activism/">lead essay</a> for the "Cato Unbound" symposium this month, I analyze recent political movements that have been aided by Internet-based communication by positing a set of questions,</p><p style="padding-left: 30px;">Activists played important roles in bringing down dictators in the Arab world, stopping the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in Congress and electing Barack Obama—just to name a few examples. But how much did the Internet matter in making these watershed events possible? How effective is it likely to be in the future? And how would we measure whether activism “works” for society—not just the activists?</p><p>I respond to the concerns raised by Evgeny Morozov in his iconoclastic 2010 book, <em><a href="http://netdelusion.com/">The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom</a></em> (summarized in his short essay in TechFreedom's free ebook <em><a href="http://nextdigitaldecade.com">The Next Digital Decade: Essays on the Future of the Internet</a></em>). In general, I suggest that we simply do not yet understand the Internet's effect on activism well enough to make strong normative judgments about it. But applying <a href="http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/PublicChoice.html">Public Choice theory</a> can help us understand how developments in communication technologies are changing the relationship between an individual and the group in social movements. A few highlights:</p><ul><li>Social media lower organizational costs, especially of recruiting members, but also noticeability: “members’ ability to notice each other’s actions.” Even in 2003, there was little way to tell whether your friends actually followed through when you asked them to help join a cause. But today, it’s easy to encourage them to re-share material on Facebook or Twitter—and to “notice” whether they’ve done so.</li><li>Social media allows members of large groups—think Twitter followers—to be continuously bombarded with propaganda about the worthiness of the cause creating social pressures not entirely unlike those that can be generated in a face-to face group. </li><li>The Internet empowers large, dispersed groups (like dedicated Internet users) to organize against small but concentrated interests. As anyone who works in technology policy in Washington can attest, SOPA’s implosion made Congress more cautious—at least about Internet regulation, where fear of a digital activist backlash is greatest.</li><li>Ultimately, the Internet does make coordination easier among like-minded people to provide reputational feedback about corporations and governments. However we must still be vigilant—governments can and do manipulate the Internet in overt and covert ways to stifle their populations.</li><li>Activism works largely by imposing reputational costs on its targets. Online reputation markets deliver information much faster and more cheaply than ever before. </li></ul><p>I conclude by saying: "The Internet may not necessarily make the world a better place in every way, but the more we understand how it changes our relationships with each other, the better equipped we will be to steer its evolution in more humane directions."</p><p>In the coming days, <a href="http://www.cato-unbound.org/contributors/jason-benlevi/">Jason Benlevi</a>, <a href="http://www.cato-unbound.org/contributors/rebecca-mackinnon/">Rebecca MacKinnon</a> and <a href="http://www.cato-unbound.org/contributors/john-o-mcginnis/">John O. McGinnis</a> will all respond, leading to a spirited debate on the topic of Internet activism and to what degree technology really does enhance freedom.</p><p> </p> </article> <article> <h1>Join TechFreedom at the Tech Policy Summit June 6-7 in Napa</h1> <p>Berin Szoka — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 17:21:17 +0000</p> <div class="field field-type-date field-field-publication-date"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <span class="date-display-single">April 27, 2012</span> </div> </div> </div> <p>You're invited to join TechFreedom at the sixth annual <a href="http://techpolicysummit.com/">Tech Policy Summit</a>, taking place June 6-7, 2012 at the <a href="http://www.silveradoresort.com/">Silverado Resort</a> in Napa Valley. </p><p>The Tech Policy Summit is an independently-produced, nonpartisan gathering that brings together leading industry executives, investors, government affairs professionals, legal experts, academics and consumer advocates to discuss critical policy issues impacting technological innovation. Some of the topics that will be addressed at this year's Summit include:</p> <ul> <li> The role of the government in improving private sector cybersecurity</li> <li> Digital privacy and government access to data</li> <li> Responsibilities of online intermediaries </li> <li> How social media and big data are impacting policy</li> <li> Lessons learned from the SOPA/PIPA battle</li> <li> Broadband access and growth</li> <li> Emerging technologies and the future of copyright</li> </ul> <p> Confirmed speakers include Votizen CEO <a href="http://davidbinetti.com/">David Binetti</a>, former Congressman <a href="http://www.boucherforcongress.com/">Rick Boucher</a>, Google policy manager <a href="http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/bmasiello">Betsy Masiello</a>, POPVOX founder and CEO <a href="https://www.popvox.com/about/team">Marci Harris</a>, CDT’s vice president for policy <a href="https://www.cdt.org/personnel/jim-dempsey">Jim Dempsey</a>, VP of Academics and Innovation at Singularity <a href="http://wadhwa.com/">Vivek Wadhwa</a>, Politico reporter <a href="http://www.politico.com/reporters/MichelleQuinn.html">Michelle Quinn</a> and CNET chief political correspondent <a href="http://www.cnet.com/profile/declan00/">Declan McCullagh</a>. TechFreedom's <a href="http://techfreedom.org/people/berin-szoka">Berin Szoka</a> is a member of the 2012 Advisory Board for Tech Policy Summit and will be speaking at the conference. More details are available at <a href="http://techpolicysummit.com">TechPolicySummit.com</a> and additional speakers will be announced soon.</p> <p> Registration for Tech Policy Summit is <a href="http://techpolicysummit.com/">now open</a>, and you can sign up for a special TechFreedom rate of $695 with discount code <strong>TF2012</strong>. Space is limited to 200 people and the rate increases to $1,495 on May 19, so we encourage you to register early to secure your spot. </p> </article> <article> <h1>Free Market Coalition: Amend CISPA to Preserve Freedom, Prevent Gov’t Overreach</h1> <p>Berin Szoka — Sat, 21 Apr 2012 01:18:55 +0000</p> <div class="field field-type-date field-field-publication-date"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <span class="date-display-single">April 20, 2012</span> </div> </div> </div> <p>The House of Representatives is expected to vote next week on the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act of 2011 (“<a href="http://rules.house.gov/media/file/PDF_112_2/LegislativeText/CPRT-112-HPRT-RU00-HR3523.pdf">CISPA</a>”). TechFreedom and the Competitive Enterprise Institute and have joined with FreedomWorks, Americans for Limited Government, and the Liberty Coalition in sending a letter [<a href="http://techfreedom.org/sites/default/files/Free Market Coalition Letter on CISPA_1.pdf">pdf</a>] to Congress identifying several significant problems with the bill as drafted and urging recommendations to alleviate those concerns.</p><p>CISPA aims to help companies defend against cyber attacks by facilitating the sharing of cyber threat information among government agencies and the private sector. Despite the bill's noble intentions, however, it risks unduly expanding federal power, undermining freedom of contract, and harming U.S. competitiveness in the technology sector. Our coalition letter articulates the following major problems with CISPA and explains how Congress can amend the bill to fix them:<p><a href="http://techfreedom.org/blog/2012/04/20/free-market-coalition-amend-cispa-preserve-freedom-prevent-gov%E2%80%99t-overreach" target="_blank">read more</a></p> </article> <article> <h1>How the U.S. Can Lead the Way to Extraterrestrial Land Deals</h1> <p>James E. Dunstan, Berin Szoka — Tue, 10 Apr 2012 15:27:31 +0000</p> <div class="field field-type-date field-field-publication-date"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <span class="date-display-single">April 10, 2012</span> </div> </div> </div> <p>We strongly support private property rights in space. And we believe in the power of private enterprise and are convinced that only entrepreneurship can lower the cost of doing business enough to fuel a space-based economy. On these important points we agree with <a href="http://cei.org/issue-analysis/homesteading-final-frontier">Rand Simberg</a>.</p><p>But we disagree completely on the path America should take to achieve space property rights.</p><p>The basic idea is nothing new. In his book <a href="http://www.lulu.com/shop/virgiliu-pop/unreal-estate-the-men-who-sold-the-moon/hardcover/product-4228103.html;jsessionid=E8981F732779C21F0BE4A6AD9ACB19E9">Unreal Estate: The Men Who Sold the Moon</a>, Virgiliu Pop tracked hundreds of outer-space property rights claims over thousands of years, from individuals, kings, and countries, under various theories of law. All have failed the test of time.</p><p>The negotiators of the 1967 <a href="http://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/SpaceLaw/gares/html/gares_21_2222.html">Outer Space Treaty</a> knew that such claims would never stop unless the countries agreed once and for all that: “Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.”</p><p>But wait, Simberg and others argue that Article II of the Treaty only prohibits national appropriation, leaving individuals free to do whatever they want in space. Well, not so fast. Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty states:</p><p style="padding-left: 30px;">States Parties to the Treaty shall bear international responsibility for national activities in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, whether such activities are carried on by governmental agencies or by non-governmental entities, and for assuring that national activities are carried out in conformity with the provisions set forth in the present Treaty.<p><a href="http://techfreedom.org/blog/2012/04/10/how-us-can-lead-way-extraterrestrial-land-deals" target="_blank">read more</a></p> </article> <article> <h1>Downes & Manne to Participate Today on the Live Webcast "This Week in Law"</h1> <p>Larry Downes, Geoffrey Manne — Fri, 06 Apr 2012 14:41:10 +0000</p> <div class="field field-type-date field-field-publication-date"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <span class="date-display-single">April 6, 2012</span> </div> </div> </div> <p></p><p>TechFreedom Senior Adjunct Fellows <a href="http://techfreedom.org/people/larry-downes">Larry Downes</a> and <a href="http://techfreedom.org/people/geoffrey-manne">Geoffrey Manne</a> appear on today's live webcast of “<a href="http://twit.tv/show/this-week-in-law">This Week in Law</a>," hosted by Denise Howell and also including <a href="http://internetcases.com">Evan Brown</a>. Among other tech policy topics, the gang will discuss Senator Al Franken’s attack on Facebook and Google, the European Commission's newly opened antitrust probe of Motorola Mobility, and the growing spectrum crunch.</p><p><a href="http://twit.tv/show/this-week-in-law">This Week in Law</a> is recorded live every Friday at 11:00am PT/2:00pm ET and covers topics law, technology, and public policy. Registration is not required; just follow this <a href="http://twit.tv/show/this-week-in-law">link</a> at 11:00am PT/2:00pm ET to watch.</p><p></p> </article> <article> <h1>Dunstan to Remark at CEI's Property Rights in Space Event</h1> <p>James E. Dunstan — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 15:12:19 +0000</p> <div class="field field-type-date field-field-publication-date"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <span class="date-display-single">April 5, 2012</span> </div> </div> </div> <p>Today, the Competitive Enterprise Institute will host a <a href="http://cei.org/events/2012/04/05/cei-hill-briefing-securing-property-rights-space">livestreamed Capitol Hill briefing</a> to introduce a new study by Adjunct Scholar Rand Simberg: <a href="http://cei.org/issue-analysis/homesteading-final-frontier">Homesteading the Final Frontier: A Practical Proposal for Securing Property Rights in Space</a>.</p><p>The right to claim, develop, and trade property and particularly real estate has been the driving force of human exploration throughout history. Currently, this right does not exist off planet, and its absence is discouraging real investment in space development. Rand Simberg argues that the U.S. should recognize off-planet land claims by private groups and individuals under certain conditions. </p><p>TechFreedom Senior Adjunct Fellow <a href="http://techfreedom.org/people/james-e-dunstan">James E. Dunstan</a>, who is an attorney specializing in space issues, will provide remarks on the proposal. </p><p>Although both Dunstan and Simberg agree on a number of points, as Dunstan lays out in his <a href="http://techfreedom.org/sites/default/files/Dunstan Comments on Rand Simberg Space Property Rights Paper.pdf">written comments</a>,</p><p style="padding-left: 30px;">We disagree completely on the path America should take to achieve space property rights. Space property rights are nothing new. In his book, Unreal Estate: The Men Who Sold the Moon, Virgil Pop tracked hundreds of outer space property rights claims over thousands of years, from individuals, kings, and countries, under various theories of law. All have failed the test of time.</p> </article> <article> <h1>This is What Democracy Looks Like?</h1> <p>Adam Marcus — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 11:42:47 +0000</p> <div class="field field-type-date field-field-publication-date"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <span class="date-display-single">April 2, 2012</span> </div> </div> </div> <p>I've got more to say about today's release of the 1940 census rolls than just the <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57407774-83/the-census-broken-privacy-promise/">op/ed</a> that appeared in CNET today. For starters, the following chart shows how the number of questions asked on the census has increased over time. And remember: Responding to every one of these questions is MANDATORY, punishable by fines and/or imprisonment.</p><p><a href="/sites/default/files/Census_questions.png"></a></p> <ul> <li><b>Individual Qs</b> - Questions asked about every individual in the household (e.g. name & age)</li> <li><b>Household Qs</b> - Questions asked about the household (e.g. whether home is owned or rented)</li> <li><b>Subsample Qs</b> - Questions asked to a subsample of entire population (though answering is still mandatory for those selected)</li> <li><b>Total</b> - The total number of questions including all of the above</li> </ul> </article> <article> <h1>Treasure trove of Census data stumbles on launch</h1> <p>Adam Marcus — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 16:33:35 +0000</p> <div class="field field-type-date field-field-citation-date"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <span class="date-display-single">April 3, 2012</span> </div> </div> </div> <div class="field field-type-link field-field-link"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <a href="http://fcw.com/articles/2012/04/02/1940-census-nara.aspx">Treasure trove of Census data stumbles on launch</a> </div> </div> </div> <div class="field field-type-date field-field-publication-date"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <span class="date-display-single">April 2, 2012</span> </div> </div> </div> <p>In an article about the overwhelming interest in the release of the 1940 census data that overloaded the official website, Federal Computer Week quotes Adam Marcus's C|NET piece. Susan Cooper, director of communications for NARA responded by saying "We haven't really had any privacy concerns."</p> </article> <article> <h1>Szoka Cautions NTIA Privacy Multistakeholder Self-Regulatory Process</h1> <p>Berin Szoka — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 19:54:04 +0000</p> <div class="field field-type-date field-field-publication-date"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <span class="date-display-single">April 2, 2012</span> </div> </div> </div> <p>TechFreedom President <a href="http://techfreedom.org/people/berin-szoka">Berin Szoka</a> filed comments on the NTIA's <a href="http://www.ntia.doc.gov/federal-register-notice/2012/multistakeholder-process-develop-consumer-data-privacy-codes-conduct">Multistakeholder Process to Develop Consumer Data Privacy Codes of Conduct</a>. The following statement can be attributed to Szoka:</p><p style="padding-left: 30px;">The White House Report wisely recognizes that the “flexibility, speed, and decentralization necessary to address Internet policy challenges” can come only from self-regulation. But avoiding “failure by design” in the multistakeholder process envisioned by NTIA depends on the following questions: (1) What role will government play?; (2) Just how “open” and “transparent” must the process be?; (3) How may civil society groups participate in the process?; (4) By whom will self-regulatory codes of conduct be subject to approval?; (5) Regardless of who votes, what will be the mechanism for voting?; (6) Will there be a shot clock for the process?; (7) How will the initial selection of issues work? and (8) How exactly will self-regulatory codes of conduct be updated?</p><p style="padding-left: 30px;">In particular, if industry is to reach consensus on improving privacy practices, they must be able to negotiate in private. Moreover, if self-regulation is to deliver the “flexibility, speed, and decentralization" necessary to forge workable privacy protections that also promote innovation, as the White House hopes, it must be up to industry to vote on codes of conduct. Privacy advocates can certainly inform and shape the outcome of the self-regulatory process even without voting on its outcome. </p><p>Read Szoka's full comments <a href="http://techfreedom.org/sites/default/files/Comments to NTIA on Self-Regulatory Process 4.2.12.pdf">here</a>.</p><p>Szoka is available for comment at <a href="mailto:media@techfreedom.org">media@techfreedom.org</a>.</p> </article> </main></body></html>