New America
Nonprofit Coalition Letter Urges FCC to Reject Cellular Industry Effort to Upend Historic Spectrum Sharing Framework
A broad-based coalition of nonprofit groups [including the Benton Foundation] filed a letter calling on the Federal Communications Commission to reject a proposal from the cellular industry, filed by CTIA on June 16, to re-open and revise the rules finalized more than a year ago for a new Citizens Broadband Radio Service (CBRS) that opens a large frequency band of unused Navy spectrum for small area, high-capacity broadband innovation. The coalition represents consumers, public institutions and small business users of broadband, and includes the Schools, Health & Libraries Broadband Coalition, Next Century Cities, Engine, the R Street Institute, the American Library Association and the National Hispanic Media Coalition. The coalition asks the FCC to instead move rapidly to complete implementation of this historic innovation in spectrum policy, which opens unused military spectrum for sharing with Priority Access Licenses that are available for small areas (census tracts) and short terms, thereby making them more useful and affordable to smaller operators and to venues for indoor use.
Taking the Fight for Digital Rights to Our Libraries
Increasingly, the library is the place where people trust—and use—not just the librarian at the help desk, but also the search engine, online catalogs, digital archives, and electronic databases. So when patrons come into the library to find out about a sexually transmitted disease, for example, they will likely find themselves interacting with the online library—a messy mixture of library-specific digital tools and broader Internet resources that create all sorts of privacy risks for patrons.
Here’s how the library encounters privacy risks. Increasingly, the library contracts with a number of third parties to run various services, for example, OverDrive for e-book services, Bibliocommons for interactive catalogs, and ProQuest for electronic and magazine databases. Companies like these have the power to set their terms of service. That includes protecting the details of what patrons do when they use such tools or not. Not too long ago, library professionals caught Adobe Digital Editions transmitting patrons’ e-reading information in an unencrypted manner. Designed to seamlessly integrate with a library’s website, most services don’t make it obvious to a patron that a private company makes choices about her user data.
Open Technology Institute's Reform Priorities for Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act
Congress has until December 31 to renew the FISA Amendments Act or it will expire, and with it, the highly controversial, large-scale surveillance authorities under Section 702. As Congress debates whether to renew Section 702, it must consider needed reforms so that surveillance will be narrowly tailored to the law’s stated purpose - stopping both terrorism and espionage - and so that millions of Americans’ communications will no longer be swept up in its net. The Open Technology Institute’s Section 702 reform priorities include:
- Limit the Scope of Collection Under Section 702
- Enhance Post-Collection Protections for Americans’ Communications that are Swept Up Under Section 702
- Increase Transparency for the Government and Companies
Redrawing the Battle Lines in the ISP Privacy Debate
Some have argued the Federal Communications Commission should not have privacy authority at all because it lacks privacy “expertise, personnel, or understanding.” But Congress should not heed those arguments.
The FCC has long protected the privacy of telephone customers and would use that expertise in enforcing broadband privacy. Nor should Congress attempt to gut the Federal Trade Commission’s authority by, for instance, capping the time period of consent decrees at eight years rather than the typical 20 years, which Congress has indicated it wants to do. The FTC has been an effective privacy protector for the past two decades in part because it has many tools to protect consumers. Congress would be making a mistake should it undermine either agency’s authority in the name of “protecting” consumer privacy. Americans want and deserve better privacy protections—and they almost got them. Unfortunately, Congress and the president had different plans and have made it more difficult for consumers to protect their privacy. But there are still some paths forward, even if less optimal, to protect broadband privacy. The battle lines have been redrawn, and we have to adjust—quickly.
Who Run the Network? Men.
[Commentary] Are organizations taking sexual harassment allegations against powerful men seriously? Given that Fox News host Bill O’Reilly will soon be taking a permanent vacation from the network in light of sexual assault allegations, you might think, yes, of course they are. But I doubt even this move will add up to real change. To investigate why, we ought to look at a defining feature of networks like Fox—the fact that they’re run almost exclusively by men—and what this frequently means for pushing back against sexual harassment in the workplace.
Republicans Complaining About Surveillance Are Still Ignoring Civil Liberties Issues
[Commentary] By all means, let’s use the President Donald Trump fuss about spying to foster a discussion about so-called “incidental” spying that collects the American side of a conversation with a targeted foreigner without a warrant. Let’s be honest that “incidental” spying—to identify potential spies or terrorists collaborating with foreigners—is a big part of the point of the spying. But let’s not let political expediency completely muddle that discussion and, in the process, misrepresent where the greatest risks in America’s spying programs lie.
[Marcy Wheeler is a journalist specializing in national security and civil liberties]
Companies Aren’t off the Hook When It Comes to User Privacy
The Federal Communications Commission privacy guidelines would have put some of this control back in consumers’ hands: They required broadband providers to obtain opt-in consent from consumers to use and share sensitive information, and to allow users to opt out of the use and sharing of non-sensitive information, meaning the companies could use and share non-sensitive information until the consumer tells them otherwise.
Internet service provider lobbyists and the current FCC chairman have argued that these privacy regulations are unfair because they single out telecommunications companies, whereas “edge providers”—companies that run internet platforms and services like Google or Facebook—aren’t being regulated in the same way. Put differently, this argument basically says that companies like Google are already keeping records of users’ search history, so why can’t broadband providers also keep records of users’ browsing history? But this sort of “race to the bottom” mentality misses the point, and it’s harmful from a privacy standpoint. Both types of companies should be more explicit about their practices for handling user information, and both should give users control over how this information is used, regardless of whether it’s required. Users’ trust, not to mention their business, is on the line.
Fake News, Media Literacy, and the Role of Our Nation’s Schools
Fake news is simply the canary in the coal mine of a much larger systemic failure—the crumbling of an entire set of institutions in the face of seismic forces shaking our society. Our democracy itself is far shakier than most of us could ever have imagined. Teaching our students to read newspapers of record as part of teaching them to develop critical thinking skills is part of a long-term solution. But for the adults in the room, sending money and providing subscriptions will not substitute for sustained and immediate civic action on all our parts.
Ranking Digital Rights Partners with Consumer Reports to Set Standards for Privacy and Security
Consumer Reports is launching a new initiative to develop a digital standard to measure the privacy and security of products, apps, and services with the goal of helping companies prioritize consumers’ data security and privacy needs. The standard was developed in partnership with leading privacy, security, and consumer rights organizations.
Ranking Digital Rights, a non-profit research initiative housed at New America’s Open Technology Institute (OTI), was a partner in the collaborative effort. Ranking Digital Rights works with an international network of partners to set global standards for how companies in the information and communications technology sector should respect freedom of expression and privacy, and will be launching their 2017 Corporate Accountability Index on March 23. The Index evaluates 22 of the world’s most powerful telecommunications, internet and mobile companies on disclosed commitments and policies affecting users’ freedom of expression and privacy. The digital standard draws from the Ranking Digital Rights research methodology along with other technical testing and research methodologies developed by other coalition partners.