News & Commentary

We recently announced that it's time for a privacy check-in for location-based services and mobile devices. Apparently Apple didn't get the memo, as its latest iPhone and iPad regularly record your location in a hidden file. Join us and tell Apple that you demand control over your sensitive location information!

Yesterday, California lawmakers took an important first step towards updating reader privacy for the digital age. The California Senate Judiciary Committee passed the Reader Privacy Act of 2011 (SB 602) with a strong bipartisan vote of 4-0.

Yesterday we sent a letter to the San Francisco Entertainment Commission highlighting our concerns with proposed new rules for bars, clubs, and other venues that host various forms of live entertainment. The new rules would require the venue to use ID scanners and video cameras to monitor every performer and attendee. In doing so, they would constitute a massive invasion of the privacy rights that Californians expect and deserve.

By Amanda SimonACLU National Office

On Nov. 17, 2010, the ACLU-NC filed a suit under the California Public Records Act to demand records from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) about its recent acquisition of sodium thiopental, a controlled substance used as part of California’s lethal injection protocol for executing death row inmates. Here are the documents we have received from the CDCR to date.

Free speech means that we all have the ability to express and hear a range of ideas. But does that extend to the world of apps? We say yes. Nearly 50 million of us carry smartphones that let us browse the marketplace of online apps – which is also a marketplace of ideas and expression. Companies like Apple, Google and RIM have the power and opportunity to make sure that their users have access to a free flow of ideas in app stores.

By Rachel MyersACLU National Office

What you read says a lot about what you think and believe. That's why the ACLU, EFF, and the Samuelson Clinic at UC Berkeley filed an objection [pdf] to the proposed Google Book Search settlement on behalf of authors and readers concerned about inadequate privacy safeguards in the book service. Now a federal court has rejected that proposed settlement. In today's court opinion [pdf], the judge wrote that "[t]he privacy concerns [with Google Book Search] are real."

On April 6, the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold another hearing to discuss the woefully outdated Electronic Communications Privacy Act. (Did we mention that it was written in 1986?!)