Slashdot Mirror
EPIC Sues for FOIA Records
securitas writes: "The Electronic Privacy Information Center is suing the US government over its contracts with companies that are data-mining and profiling citizens' personal information for law enforcement agencies like the FBI, DEA, INS, IRS and ATF. ChoicePoint and Experian '...sell information on [individual] U.S. citizens, including credit information, property records, state motor vehicle records, marriage and divorce data' and international assets. The question that springs to mind is who else has access to these detailed profiles besides the government, now that massively expanded investigative powers are being used following 9/11?"
rfd fjhg d hjgd jh gjdhg jdshg jf jdry to keep posts on topic.
Try to reply to other people comments instead of sthg ddf jdf
Mod parent UP!
"Why did they cancel my favorite Sci-Fi show? I downloaded ALL the episodes!"
The Cure - Close To You
I've waited hours for this
I've made myself so sick
I wish I'd stayed asleep today
I never thought that this day would end
I never thought that tonight could ever be
This close to me
Just try to see in the dark
Just try to make it work
To feel the fear before you're here
I make the shapes come much too close
I pull my eyes out
Hold my breath
And wait until I shake
But if I had your faith
Then I could make it safe and clean
If only I was sure
That my head on the door was a dream
I've waited hours for this
I've made myself so sick
I wish I'd stayed asleep today
I never thought that this day would end
I never thought that tonight could ever be
This close to me
But if I had your face
I could make it safe and clean
If only I was sure
That my head on the door
Was a dream
This article is a bit misleading. To clarify, the DOJ et al. are being sued for failing to respond to a FOIA request for information relating to their use of information from the corporate sources mentioned.
Why didn't this make the front page?
Try 'ego suffering' on google sometime
;)
A friend of mine used to brag about how anonymous she was until we found she had been ratted out by classmates.com and picked up by Google
I know there are a lot of state and local government agencies that are going web-based -- and yes, certainly there are lots of bits of information that are classified as public domain, but the ability for joe-schmoe to assimilate that information in essentially a meta-data source way is kind of freaky
Especially is joe-schmoe is an ID thief -- and is about to put what little credit rating you have in the toilet by applying and getting credit cards, auto loans, etc
all from the information we're leaking
NOTE: I'm not saying that the information shouldn't be available as a matter of public disclosure -- i just think we need to re-evaluate what should be considered private and not.
The fear of leaking SSN's before is really hardly relevant given the amount of information that can be found based on your phone number
Old age and treachery almost always overcome youth and skill.
Forget about needing a phone number. Most of the time you just need a name and some decent social engineering skills to do some identity theft. Credit files are usually outdated, but you'd be amazed what great-aunt mildred will tell the nice collector about you.
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
C.A. No. 02-0063
ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER
v.1718 Connecticut Ave. NW.
Suite 200
Washington, DC 20009
Plaintiff,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
and
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20220
Defendants.
_______________________________________
COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1. This is an action under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552,
for injunctive and other appropriate relief and seeking the disclosure and
release of agency records improperly withheld from plaintiff by defendant
Department of Justice ("DOJ") and its components Federal Bureau of
Investigation ("FBI"), United States Marshals Service ("USMS"), Drug
Enforcement Agency ("DEA"), Immigration and Naturalization Service ("INS"),
and defendant U.S. Treasury ("Treasury") and its components Internal Revenue
Service ("IRS"), and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms ("ATF").
Jurisdiction and Venue
2. This Court has both subject matter jurisdiction over this action and
personal jurisdiction over the parties pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(B).
This court also has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
1331. Venue lies in this district under 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(B).
3. Plaintiff Electronic Privacy Information Center ("EPIC") is a public
interest non-profit research organization in Washington, DC. It was
established in 1994 to focus public attention on emerging civil liberties
issues and to protect privacy, the First Amendment, and constitutional
values. EPIC's activities include the review of federal data collection and
data sharing policies to determine their possible impacts on civil liberties
and privacy interests. Among its other activities, EPIC has prepared reports
and presented testimony on privacy issues and has participated in and
organized conferences on privacy.
4. Defendant DOJ is a Department of the Executive Branch of the United
States Government, and includes component entities FBI, USMS, DEA, and INS.
The DOJ is an agency within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 552(f).
5. Defendant Treasury is a Department of the Executive Branch of the United
States Government, and includes component entities IRS and ATF. The Treasury
is an agency within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 552(f).
Government Agencies' Acquisition of Private Sector Personal Information
6. On April 13, 2001, the Wall Street Journal reported that executive branch
agencies were purchasing "troves of personal data from the private sector."
Glenn R. Simpson, Big Brother-in-Law, If the FBI Hopes to Get the Goods on
You, It May Ask ChoicePoint, Wall St. J., April 13, 2001 at A1.
7. The article quoted government sources for the proposition that DOJ, FBI,
USMS, INS, and IRS employees had electronic access to citizens' assets,
phone numbers, driving records, and other personal information from their
desktop computers.
8. The article reported that ChoicePoint, a publicly-held company, and its
competitors were supplying citizens' personal information to at least
thirty-five federal government agencies.
9. The use of private sector databases of personal information enables the
government to obtain detailed information on citizens while avoiding the
creation of files that would implicate protections provided under the
Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a.
Plaintiff's FOIA Requests and Defendants' Failure to Respond
10. By separate letters to DOJ, FBI, USMS, DEA, INS, IRS, and ATF dated June
22, 2001, plaintiff submitted Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA") requests
for "all records relating to transactions, communications, and contracts
concerning businesses that sell individuals' personal information." A copy
of the news article referenced in paragraphs 6-8, supra, accompanied the
request.
Defendant DOJ's Failure to Timely Comply with Plaintiff's Request
11. By phone call on June 29, 2001, defendant DOJ informed plaintiff that
the request would be forwarded to a component within the DOJ.
12. To date, defendant DOJ has not provided the records requested by
plaintiff in its FOIA request, notwithstanding the FOIA's requirement of an
agency response within twenty (20) working days.
13. Plaintiff has exhausted the applicable administrative remedies with
respect to its FOIA request to defendant DOJ.
14. Defendant DOJ has wrongfully withheld the requested records from plaintiff.
The FBI's Failure to Timely Comply with Plaintiff's Request
15. By form letter to plaintiff dated July 3, 2001, the FBI acknowledged
receipt of plaintiff's FOIA request.
16. By form letter to plaintiff dated July 27, 2001, the FBI requested
clarification of plaintiff's FOIA request.
17. By letter dated August 8, 2001, plaintiff clarified its request to the
FBI by specifying that the subject matter of the request related to
ChoicePoint, Inc.
18. To date, the FBI has not provided the records requested by plaintiff in
its FOIA request, notwithstanding the FOIA's requirement of an agency
response within twenty (20) working days.
19. Plaintiff has exhausted the applicable administrative remedies with
respect to its FOIA request to the FBI.
20. The FBI has wrongfully withheld the requested records from plaintiff.
The USMS' Failure to Timely Comply with Plaintiff's Request
21. By form letter to plaintiff dated July 11, 2001, the USMS acknowledged
receipt of plaintiff's request.
22. To date, the USMS has not provided the records requested by plaintiff in
its FOIA request, notwithstanding the FOIA's requirement of an agency
response within twenty (20) working days.
23. Plaintiff has exhausted the applicable administrative remedies with
respect to its FOIA request to the USMS.
24. The USMS has wrongfully withheld the requested records from plaintiff.
The DEA's Failure to Timely Comply with Plaintiff's Request
25. By form letter to plaintiff dated July 26, 2001, DEA requested
clarification of plaintiff's FOIA request.
26. By letter dated August 8, 2001, plaintiff clarified its request to the
DEA by specifying that the subject matter of the request related to
ChoicePoint, Inc.
27. To date, the DEA has not provided the records requested by plaintiff in
its FOIA request, notwithstanding the FOIA's requirement of an agency
response within twenty (20) working days.
28. Plaintiff has exhausted the applicable administrative remedies with
respect to its FOIA request to the DEA.
29. The DEA has wrongfully withheld the requested records from plaintiff.
The INS' Failure to Timely Comply with Plaintiff's Request
30. By form letter dated August 9, 2001, defendant INS acknowledged receipt
of plaintiff's request.
31. To date, the INS has not provided the records requested by plaintiff in
its FOIA request, notwithstanding the FOIA's requirement of an agency
response within twenty (20) working days.
32. Plaintiff has exhausted the applicable administrative remedies with
respect to its FOIA request to the INS.
33. The INS has wrongfully withheld the requested records from plaintiff.
The IRS' Partial Denial of Plaintiff's Request
34. By letter dated September 10, 2001, the IRS provided documents
responsive to plaintiff's request. However, the IRS withheld 324 pages,
relying upon 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4). Plaintiff appealed this withholding by
letter dated November 8, 2001.
35. By form letter to plaintiff dated November 16, 2001, the IRS denied
plaintiff's appeal.
36. Plaintiff has exhausted the applicable administrative remedies with
respect to its FOIA request to the IRS.
37. The IRS has wrongfully withheld the requested records from plaintiff.
The ATF's Failure to Timely Comply with Plaintiff's Request
38. By letter to plaintiff dated August 8, 2001, the ATF acknowledged
plaintiff's request.
39. By letter to plaintiff dated September 13, 2001, the ATF granted
plaintiff's request in part and informed plaintiff that there would be a
delay in locating responsive documents.
40. Plaintiff has exhausted the applicable administrative remedies with
respect to its FOIA request to the ATF.
41. The ATF has wrongfully withheld the requested records from plaintiff.
Requested Relief
WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays that this Court:
A. order defendants to disclose the requested records in their entireties
and make copies available to plaintiff;
B. provide for expeditious proceedings in this action;
C. award plaintiff its costs and reasonable attorneys fees incurred in this
action; and
D. grant such other relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
Respectfully submitted,
___________________________________
CHRIS J. HOOFNAGLE
D.C. Bar No. 463182
DAVID L. SOBEL
D.C. Bar No. 360418
MARC ROTENBERG
D.C. Bar. No. 422825
ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER
1718 Connecticut Ave. NW
Suite 200
Washington, DC 20009
(202) 483-1140
* g o a t s e x * g o a t s e x * g o a t s e x * g g o / \ \ / \ o a \ a t `. : t s` \ s e \ / / \\\ -- \\ : e x \ \/ --~~ ~-- \ x * \ \-~ ~-\ * g \ \Counsel for Plaintiff
Proof of the gay-linux conspiracy!