Wednesday, February 19, 2003 :::
California Library Association
Resolution In Support of User Privacy and Freedom of Information in Libraries
WHEREAS, the professional ethic of librarianship is to facilitate the free flow of information, to facilitate its distribution, and to protect the privacy of those who seek information, and
WHEREAS, the USA PATRIOT Act and other recently enacted laws, regulations, and guidelines threaten to stifle discussion and information access, and
WHEREAS, the provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act expand the authority of the federal government to detain and investigate citizens and non-citizens, to engage in electronic surveillance of citizens and non-citizens, and to threaten civil rights and liberties guaranteed under the United States Constitution; and
WHEREAS, the USA PATRIOT Act increases the likelihood that the activities of library users, including their use of computers to Web browse or access e-mail, may be spied upon without the user's knowledge, and
WHEREAS, many sections of the USA PATRIOT Act compromise the basic Constitutional rights of individuals and weaken the concept of "innocent until proven guilty," and
WHEREAS, prior restraint has caused many Web sites to curtail providing essential information in order to avoid the perception of abetting terrorism, and
WHEREAS, the USA PATRIOT Act disproportionately affects the poor and unemployed, many of whom rely on computers in libraries and other public places;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the California Library Association encourages all librarians to educate their service communities, stakeholders, staff and users about the far-reaching dangers of the USA PATRIOT Act and other recently enacted laws, regulations, and guidelines; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the California Library Association strongly condemns any current and future legislation that erodes privacy, information access and Constitutional rights and opposes the use of governmental power to suppress the free and open exchange of information and ideas; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the California Library Association calls for the amendment of those sections of the USA PATRIOT Act that violate fundamental rights and liberties guaranteed in the United States Constitution; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the California Library Association supports the actions of the American Library Association as outlined in the American Library Association Resolution on the USA PATRIOT Act and Related Measures; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the California Library Association will affirm and uphold the efforts of librarians everywhere to defend and support user privacy and free and open access to information.
Approved February 12, 2003 by the California Library Association
::: posted by Karen at 10:34 AM
Friday, December 13, 2002 :::
Report on the USA PATRIOT Act Videoconference, 12/11/02 (Final Version) CLA Intellectual Freedom Committee
(Please forward as you see fit)
-----------------
The USA PATRIOT Videoconference presentation was an excellent beginning. The presenters were knowledgeable and stayed on topic. Special kudos to the moderator, Doris McMillon, who did a great job of focusing the presenters and managing discussion.
Below are some of the major points that came across in the program (comments in brackets are clarifications or expansions provided by library lawyer Mary Minow, who kindly vetted this work). This is just a report--not legal advice!
----------------
The USA PATRIOT Act is not likely to be repealed any time soon if at all, but a few important provisions are up for renewal in 2005, and these are likely focuses for legislative action. Librarians should document all investigative actions related to the USA PATRIOT Act, because "we will need this information when it is time to sunset these laws." [Be careful to secure any records "under seal" (those that only the court and any essential parties can see) so that staff do not accidentally come across them in the course of their work.]
The USA PATRIOT Act is not the only legislation or administrative policy we should worry about; for example, FOIA has been seriously abridged by the Homeland Security Act and the general ethos under the direction of the current Attorney General; it is now harder to determine if someone or some thing has been the focus of an investigation. Lately, as Neal emphasized, we have another new threat: TIA, the "Total Information Awareness Priority," [a prototype system from DARPA under the general direction of John Poindexter, intended to merge data from banking, health, commercial, and government databases to identify precursors to terrorist activity.] The removal of government information--witnessed in large scale post 9/11--is yet another concern.
The whole is larger than the sum of the parts; there is overall greatly increased "potential for increased law enforcement abuse," "significant diminution for justification for subpoenas," and "a lowered standard for probable cause," complicated by very natural tensions between national security and intellectual freedom that are unusually exacerbated by recent terrorist attacks on U.S. soil.
The USA PATRIOT Act has some disturbingly hazy concepts. For example, while content is legally excluded from "pen and trap" wiretaps, there is no legal definition of "content." As one of the speakers noted, the FBI "is not likely to apply narrow standards to this term." Also, the lines between domestic and foreign surveillance are rapidly becoming very blurred, which makes it increasingly easy to justify domestic surveillance based on the far broader, more aggressive provisions of foreign surveillance legislation.
The computer trespasser provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act are particularly unsettling, as these sections--developed rather literally from earlier legislation targeted at telephony--require no showing of terrorism to invoke a computer trespassing investigation under the provisions of this act. Although the computer trespasser portion of USA PATRIOT Act is intended to combat hacking, not terrorism, these sections can open the way to broad-based, highly secretive investigations of computer-based activity, with no limit to duration and no requirement for reporting. In the current legislative climate, "these fishing expeditions are not just allowed, but encouraged, and libraries are fair game."
A FISA Section 215 Order (which is only one kind of investigative action) can be granted for any records, including patron and computer use, and electronic reference transactions. These orders are surrounded by a cloak of secrecy: they are signed in secret and do not state the source of their authority, and the library cannot inform the public that they have received these orders.
Business records could include patron records and computer use logs or records. State confidentiality laws do not trump federal law, and "state laws are no guard against a federal court order or subpoena." However, libraries could consider formally adopting the confidentiality guidelines of their state, even if they are trumped by federal action. [Or, more to the point, libraries should consider adopting privacy policies that treat any identifiable records as confidential, including but not limited to electronic reference transactions, Internet sign-up sheets, patron reading preferences, circulation records, and so forth.]
Regardless of the primacy of federal or state law, it's important to remember that the library may challenge ANY subpoena, regardless of where its source. [The library attorney may argue that the library could choose to comply with federal subpoenas without challenging. This is different than situations involving state-issued subpoenas, which libraries must challenge because under California law, libraries cannot give out the records without a court order. Subpoenas are not court orders unless signed by a judge.]
As a practical matter, panelists emphasized throughout the videoconference that the first action a librarian should take if served a subpoena or court order is to contact the library's counsel. If investigators arrive with a search warrant, they should be allowed to do their work, but a subpoena requires no other immediate action than referring the document to a lawyer as quickly as possible. Librarians should establish policy that if staff are approached without legal paperwork, they should not hand over materials, but instead should quickly upchannel the issue to a supervisor empowered to contact the library's legal counsel.
It cannot be overemphasized that the library has the legal right to review and challenge any subpoena. This must be explicitly addressed in library policy, procedure, and training.
Libraries should also have record retention policies, and should have procedures in place for auditing their own privacy practices. Communication with all staff is key, but is particularly important with respect to IT staff, who may not realize what they are logging or why this is a matter of concern.
Some meta-points: Neal emphasized how important it is for us to "reach beyond the reach of our libraries, administrations, etc." and build broad coalitions; Strong emphasized the need for "protocols, procedure, and training." While Susman said that posting notices in libraries alerting patrons to the provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act might have a "chilling effect," Neal countered that "people need to understand that what they do may be subject to investigation," then went on to remind listeners that we trace our professional values in part through the guidelines of the Library Bill of Rights. Neal concluded by quoting John F. Kennedy: "let our patriotism be reflected in the creation of confidence rather than crusades of suspicion."
Coda: It was clear from the call-in questions and the pre- and post-conference discussions that many librarians need help with the mechanics of 21st century privacy protection. These areas include helping librarians develop privacy policies, procedures, and audits, and helping librarians understand technical distinctions among legal investigative activities. A basic fact sheet and glossary would be very useful; for example, the distinctions among warrants, subpoenas, and court orders is poorly understood. Most of us would have trouble defining key terms such as "pen and trap," "FISA subpoena," and "computer trespasser," let alone feel comfortable appropriate policy and procedures around the same. A template for a privacy audit, and model policies and procedures, would also be helpful (one model policy was included in the handouts for the videoconference).
Conference URL (tapes may be purchased, although licensees were encouraged to make one copy, so your library or system may have this
available):
http://www.arl.org/patriot/index.html
Sponsors for this Videoconference:
American Association of Law Libraries
American Library Association
Association of Research Libraries
Medical Library Association
Special Libraries Association
Panelists:
Tracy Mitrano
Policy Advisor, Director of Computer Law and Policy
Office of the Vice President for Information Technology
Cornell University
James Neal
Vice President and University Librarian
Columbia University Libraries
Gary Strong
Director
Queens Borough Public Library
Thomas M. Susman
Partner, Ropes & Gray
Washington, D.C.
------------------------------------------
This report submitted by
Karen G. Schneider, Chair
California Library Association Intellectual Freedom Committee claifc@hotmail.com kgs@bluehighways.com
::: posted by Karen at 7:11 AM
Tuesday, December 10, 2002 :::
FOURTH DRAFT: Resolution In Support of Patron Privacy and Freedom of Information in Libraries
WHEREAS, the professional ethic of librarianship is to facilitate the free flow of information, to facilitate its distribution and to protect the privacy of those who seek information: and
WHEREAS, recent legislation, including the USA PATRIOT Act, threatens to stifle discussion and information access, and
WHEREAS, the provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act expand the authority of the federal government to detain and investigate citizens and non-citizens, to engage in electronic surveillance of citizens and non-citizens, and to threaten civil rights and liberties guaranteed under the United States Constitution; and
WHEREAS, the USA PATRIOT Act increases the likelihood that the activities of library patrons, including their use of computers to Web browse or access e-mail, may be spied upon without the patron's knowledge, and
WHEREAS, many sections of the USA PATRIOT Act compromise the basic Constitutional rights of individuals and weaken the concept of "innocent until proven guilty," and
WHEREAS, prior restraint has caused many Web sites to curtail providing essential information in order to avoid the perception of abetting terrorism, and
WHEREAS, the USA PATRIOT Act disproportionately affects the poor and unemployed, many of whom rely on computers in libraries and other public places;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the California Library Association encourages all librarians to educate their service communities, stakeholders, staff and patrons about the far-reaching dangers of the current legislation, including the provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the California Library Association strongly condemns any current and future legislation that erodes privacy, information access and Constitutional rights and opposes the use of governmental power to suppress the free and open exchange of information and ideas; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the California Library Association calls for the repeal of those sections of the USA PATRIOT Act that violate fundamental rights and liberties guaranteed in the United States Constitution; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the California Library Association will affirm and uphold the efforts of librarians everywhere to defend and support patron privacy and free and open access to information.
::: posted by Karen at 1:36 PM
Wednesday, November 27, 2002 :::
THIRD DRAFT: RESOLUTION ON [TITLE?]
WHEREAS, the professional ethic of librarianship is to facilitate the free flow of information, to facilitate its distribution and to protect the privacy of those who seek information: and
WHEREAS, recent legislation, including the USA PATRIOT Act, threatens to stifle discussion and information access, and
WHEREAS, the provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act expand the authority of the federal government to detain and investigate citizens and non-citizens, to engage in electronic surveillance of citizens and non-citizens, and to threaten civil rights and liberties guaranteed under the United States Constitution; and
WHEREAS, the USA PATRIOT Act increases the likelihood that the activities of library patrons, including their use of computers to Web browse or access e-mail, may be spied upon without the patron's knowledge, and
WHEREAS, many sections of the USA PATRIOT Act such compromise the basic Constitutional rights of individuals and weaken the concept of "innocent until proven guilty," and
WHEREAS, prior restraint has caused many Web sites to curtail providing essential information in order to avoid the perception of abetting terrorism, and
WHEREAS, [digital divide]:
key points:
Poor and unemployed people rely on public computers
USA PATRIOT Act and other legislation targets public computers through provisions such as roving wiretaps
Ergo, poor and unemployed people are unfairly targeted by this legislation
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the California Library Association encourages all librarians to educate their service communities, stakeholders, staff and patrons about the far-reaching dangers of the current legislation, including the provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the California Library Association strongly condemns any current and future legislation that erodes privacy, information access and Constitutional rights and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the California Library Association opposes the use of governmental power to suppress the free and open exchange of information and ideas, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the California Library Association will affirm and uphold the efforts of librarians everywhere to defend and support patron privacy and free and open access to information.
::: posted by Karen at 10:13 AM
Monday, November 25, 2002 :::
Karen's Wordsmithy suggestions:
Comma after distribution
Web for web
"innocent until proven guilty," [comma inside " ]
-----------------
And syntax, but entirely take-it-or-leave-it on my part:
WHEREAS, the USA PATRIOT threatens to increase the digital divide, since Libraries are frequently the only access to computers and other sources of information for poor and unemployed citizens and non-citizens;
----------------
And the following (original crafted by yours truly without pondering who would read it) may be less oblique than my original? Or scotch it entirely, because it's largely addressed by the third Whereas?
WHEREAS, many sections of the USA PATRIOT Act undermine basic Constitutional rights and weaken the concept of "innocent until proven guilty," and
::: posted by Karen at 11:23 PM
Wordsmithy suggestions:
Comma after distribution
Web for web
"innocent until proven guilty," [comma inside " ]
-----------------
And syntax, but entirely take-it-or-leave-it on my part:
WHEREAS, the USA PATRIOT threatens to increase the digital divide, since Libraries are frequently the only access to computers and other sources of information for poor and unemployed citizens and non-citizens;
----------------
And the following (original crafted by yours truly without pondering who would read it) may be less oblique than my original? Or scotch it entirely, because it's largely addressed by the third Whereas?
WHEREAS, many sections of the USA PATRIOT Act undermine basic Constitutional rights and weaken the concept of "innocent until proven guilty," and
::: posted by Karen at 11:22 PM
Jackie's rewrite:
WHEREAS, the professional ethic of librarianship is to facilitate the free flow of information, to facilitate its distribution and to protect the privacy of those who seek information: and
WHEREAS, recent legislation, including the USA PATRIOT Act, threatens to stifle discussion and information access, and
WHEREAS, the provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act expand the authority of the federal government to detain and investigate citizens and non-citizens, engage in electronic surveillance of citizens and non-citizens, and threaten civil rights and liberties guaranteed under the United States Constitution; and
WHEREAS, the USA PATRIOT Act increases the likelihood that the activities of library patrons, including their use of computers to web browse or access e-mail, may be spied upon without the patron's knowledge, and
WHEREAS, many sections of the USA PATRIOT Act such as roving wiretaps and FISA gag orders, create new inroads into the rights of individuals and weaken the concept of "innocent until proven guilty", and
WHEREAS, prior restraint has caused many Web sites to curtail providing essential information in order to avoid the perception of abetting terrorism, and
WHEREAS, Libraries are frequently the only access many poor and unemployeed citizens and non-citizens have to computers and other sources of information, the USA PATRIOT Act, threatens to increase the digital divide;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the California Library Association encourages all librarians to educate their service communities, stakeholders, staff and patrons about the far-reaching dangers of the current legislation, including the provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the California Library Association strongly condems any current and future legislation that erodes privacy, information access and Constitutional rights and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the California Library Association opposes the use of governmental power to suppress the free and open exchange of information and ideas, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the California Library Association will support and uphold the efforts of librarians everywhere to defend and support patron privacy and free and open access to information
::: posted by Karen at 10:53 PM
Suggested by Mairi:
WHEREAS, Libraries are frequently where many poor and unemployed citizens and non-citizens have access to computers, the Internet and other sources of information, the USA PATRIOT Act threatens to increase the digital divide;
::: posted by Karen at 5:24 PM
Stacey's input:
Perhaps we could leave the 7th "whereas" as it stands now, but just add the word "because" to take of the grammatical problem: "Because libraries are frequently..." I know that leaves us with "WHEREAS, because..." which is pretty yucky, but I haven't been able to think of a more elegant solution. If we do choose to keep the current wording, then there should not be a comma between "PATRIOT Act" and "threatens."
::: posted by Karen at 3:36 PM
Cynthia's input:
In the 3rd whereas include "to" engage "to" threaten
In the 5th whereas we might say ....Patriot Act threatens to increase the digital divide by limiting access by many poor and unemployed citizens and non-citizens to library computers and other resources
In the final be it resolved.....California Library Association will affirm and uphold the efforts of librarians...............
::: posted by Karen at 3:27 PM
Wordsmithy suggestions:
Comma after distribution
Web for web
"innocent until proven guilty," [comma inside " ]
-----------------
And syntax, but entirely take-it-or-leave-it on my part:
WHEREAS, the USA PATRIOT threatens to increase the digital divide, since Libraries are frequently the only access to computers and other sources of information for poor and unemployed citizens and non-citizens;
----------------
And the following (original crafted by yours truly without pondering who would read it) may be less oblique than my original? Or scotch it entirely, because it's largely addressed by the third Whereas?
WHEREAS, many sections of the USA PATRIOT Act undermine basic Constitutional rights and weaken the concept of "innocent until proven guilty," and
::: posted by Karen at 3:25 PM
Jackie's rewrite:
WHEREAS, the professional ethic of librarianship is to facilitate the free flow of information, to facilitate its distribution and to protect the privacy of those who seek information: and
WHEREAS, recent legislation, including the USA PATRIOT Act, threatens to stifle discussion and information access, and
WHEREAS, the provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act expand the authority of the federal government to detain and investigate citizens and non-citizens, engage in electronic surveillance of citizens and non-citizens, and threaten civil rights and liberties guaranteed under the United States Constitution; and
WHEREAS, the USA PATRIOT Act increases the likelihood that the activities of library patrons, including their use of computers to web browse or access e-mail, may be spied upon without the patron's knowledge, and
WHEREAS, many sections of the USA PATRIOT Act such as roving wiretaps and FISA gag orders, create new inroads into the rights of individuals and weaken the concept of "innocent until proven guilty", and
WHEREAS, prior restraint has caused many Web sites to curtail providing essential information in order to avoid the perception of abetting terrorism, and
WHEREAS, Libraries are frequently the only access many poor and unemployeed citizens and non-citizens have to computers and other sources of information, the USA PATRIOT Act, threatens to increase the digital divide;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the California Library Association encourages all librarians to educate their service communities, stakeholders, staff and patrons about the far-reaching dangers of the current legislation, including the provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the California Library Association strongly condems any current and future legislation that erodes privacy, information access and Constitutional rights and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the California Library Association opposes the use of governmental power to suppress the free and open exchange of information and ideas, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the California Library Association will support and uphold the efforts of librarians everywhere to defend and support patron privacy and free and open access to information
::: posted by Karen at 3:19 PM
test
::: posted by Karen at 2:07 PM
