Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
Thu Aug 8, 2013, 10:13 AM Aug 2013

Have you seen the proposed reforms to the Electronic Communications Privacy Act

Introduction to ECPA

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act ("ECPA&quot was passed in 1986 to expand and revise federal wiretapping and electronic eavesdropping provisions...ECPA includes the Wiretap Act, the Stored Communications Act, and the Pen-Register Act. Wire communication refers to "any aural transfer made in whole or in part through the use of facilities for the transmission of communications by the aid of wire, cable, or other like connection"; in short, it refers to phone conversations. An oral communication is "any oral communication uttered by a person exhibiting an expectation that such communication is not subject to interception under circumstances justifying such expectation"; this constitutes any oral conversation in person where there is the expectation no third party is listening.

<...>

The adoption of cloud computing, while offering many benefits (such as convenience and ease of access), makes the need for ECPA reform more urgent. Whereas an e-mail stored on a home computer would be fully protected by the 4th Amendment warrant requirement, only the Sixth Circuit has ruled that all e-mail stored on a remote, cloud computing server is protected. More and more information, including documents, e-mails, pictures, personal calendars, and locational data is being stored in the cloud. Much of this data has little or no protection under current law. Protections for locational data, in particular, have been widely discussed, but, to date, have not been added.

<...>

Congress has held several hearings on reforming ECPA, with technology companies and digital rights groups lobbying for clear standards that are adaptable to technological advances. Law enforcement has questioned the need to ECPA reform, fearing that reforms could decrease their ability to acquire digital information in a timely manner.

Current ECPA Reform Proposals
  • Leahy - Lee, Electronic Communications Privacy Act Amendments Act of 2013, S. 607
    • Section-by-section Summary
    • Statement of Sen. Leahy
  • Paul, Fourth Amendment Preservation and Protection Act of 2013, S. 1037
  • Lofgren - Poe - DelBene, Online Communications and Geolocation Protection Act, H.R. 983
    • Section-by-section Summary
    • Statement of Rep. Lofgren
    • Statement of Rep. Poe
    • Statement of Rep. DelBene
  • Wyden - Kirk / Chaffetz - Sensenbrenner - Conyers, Geolocation Privacy and Surveillance Act, H.R. 1312, S. 639
      [liStatement of Sen. Wyden
    • Statement of Sen. Kirk
    • Statement of Rep. Chaffetz
On March 19, 2013, Senators Patrick Leahy and Mike Lee introduced the "Electronic Communications Privacy Act Amendments Act of 2013," which was reported favorably to the Senate by the Committee on the Judiciary on April 25, 2013, with an amendment from Sen. Leahy. The bill makes clear that a governmental entity may require disclosure of the contents of an electronic communication "only if the governmental entity obtains a warrant ... that is issued by a court of competent jurisdiction directing the disclosure." This would eliminate the "180-day rule" and the distinction between opened and unopened e-mails for the purposes of law enforcement access. The bill would also impose stricter notice requirements to ensure that any user whose communications are subject to a warrant will be notified promptly.

http://epic.org/privacy/ecpa/


Section By Section Breakdown Of Senator Leahy's ECPA Amendment

November 20, 2012

The rumors about warrant exceptions being added to ECPA are incorrect. Many have come forward with ideas for discussion before markup resumes on my bill to strengthen privacy protections under ECPA. As normally happens in the legislative process, these ideas are being circulated for discussion. One of them, having to do with a warrant exception, is one that I have not supported and do not support. The whole thrust of my bill is to remedy the erosion of the public’s privacy rights under the rapid advances of technology that we have seen since ECPA was first enacted thirty years ago. In particular, my proposal would require search warrants for government access to email stored by third-party service providers – something that of course was not contemplated three decades ago.

(The following is the text of the amendment Senator Leahy introduced in September 2012.)

LEAHY SUBSTITUTE TO H.R. 2471 SECTION BY SECTION

The substitute bill clarifies that video tape service providers may obtain customer consent to share video viewing information on an ongoing basis and that such consent may be given via the Internet. The substitute also updates the Electronic Communications Privacy Act to enhance consumer privacy and meet the new privacy challenges posed by cloud computing and other new technologies.

TITLE I - VIDEO PRIVACY PROTECTION

SECTION 101 -- SHORT TITLE.


This section designates the title as the Video Privacy Protection Act Amendments of 2012.

SECTION 102 - VIDEO PRIVACY PROTECTION ACT AMENDMENT.

Section 102 amends title 18, United States Codes, section 2710(b)(2) to clarify that video tape service providers may obtain a customer’s informed, written consent to share video viewing information on an ongoing basis and that such consent may be obtained via the Internet. The provision includes a requirement that video service providers provide their customers, in a clear and conspicuous manner, with the opportunity to withdraw the consent given to share video viewing information at any time.

TITLE II - ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS PRIVACY

SECTION 201 – SHORT TITLE.


This section designates the title as the Electronic Communications Privacy Act Amendments Act of 2012.

SECTION 202 – CONFIDENTIALITY OF ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS.

Section 202 amends title 18, United States Code, section 2702 (the Electronic Communications Privacy Act or “ECPA”) to prohibit an electronic communication or remote computing service provider from voluntarily disclosing the contents of its customer’s email or other electronic communications to the Government. There are limited exceptions to this prohibition under current law, including, customer consent and disclosure to law enforcement to address criminal activity.

SECTION 203 – ELIMINATION OF 180 DAY RULE; SEARCH WARRANT REQUIREMENT FOR CONTENT; REQUIRED DISCLOSURE OF CUSTOMER RECORDS.

Section 203 amends ECPA so that the disclosure of the content of email and other electronic communications by an electronic communication or remote computing service provider to the Government is subject to one clear legal standard -- a search warrant issued based on a showing of probable cause. The provision eliminates the confusing and outdated “180-day” rule that calls for different legal standards for the Government to obtain email content, depending upon the email’s age. The provision also requires that the Government notify the individual whose account was disclosed, and provide that individual with a copy of the search warrant and other details about the information obtained, within three days.

Section 203 also reaffirms current law to clarify that the Government may use an administrative or grand jury subpoena in order to obtain certain kinds of electronic communication records from a service provider, including customer name, address, session time records, length of service information, subscriber number and temporarily assigned network address, and means and source of payment information.

SECTION 204 – DELAYED NOTICE.

Section 204 amends section 2705 of ECPA to provide that the Government may seek a court order to delay notifying an individual of that fact that the Government has accessed the contents of the individual’s electronic communications for up to 90 days. This delay period may be extended for a period of up to an additional 90 days at a time by a court. Section 204 also establishes a 90-day time limit on the period that the Government could prevent a service provider from informing its customer about the disclosure of electronic communications information to the Government. This time period may be extended by a court for up to an additional 90 days at a time.

http://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/section-by-section-breakdown-of-senator-leahys-ecpa-amendment


1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Have you seen the proposed reforms to the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (Original Post) ProSense Aug 2013 OP
Kick! n/t ProSense Aug 2013 #1
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Have you seen the propose...