-
3 weeks ago | 
eff.org | Maddie Daly |India McKinney
Share It Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Copy link Enacting strong federal consumer data privacy laws is among EFF’s highest priorities. For decades, EFF has advocated for federal privacy law that is concrete, ambitious, and fully protective of all Americans’ data privacy.
-
1 month ago | 
eff.org | India McKinney
The House Energy and Commerce Committee on Tuesday advanced the TAKE IT DOWN Act (S. 146) , a bill that seeks to speed up the removal of certain kinds of troubling online content. While the bill is meant to address a serious problem—the distribution of non-consensual intimate imagery (NCII)—the notice-and-takedown system it creates is an open invitation for powerful people to pressure websites into removing content they dislike.
-
1 month ago | 
eff.org | India McKinney
El Comité de Energía y Comercio de la Cámara de Representantes presentó este martes la Ley TAKE IT DOWN (S. 146), un proyecto que busca agilizar la eliminación de ciertos tipos de contenido problemático en línea.
-
1 month ago | 
eff.org | India McKinney
Once again, several Senators appear poised to gut one of the most important laws protecting internet users - Section 230 (47 U.S.C. § 230). Don’t be fooled - many of Section 230’s detractors claim that this critical law only protects big tech. The reality is that Section 230 provides limited protection for all platforms, though the biggest beneficiaries are small platforms and users. Why else would some of the biggest platforms be willing to endorse a bill that guts the law?
-
2 months ago | 
eff.org | India McKinney
Earlier this month, the Senate passed the TAKE IT DOWN Act (S. 146), by a voice vote. The bill is meant to speed up the removal of non-consensual intimate imagery, or NCII, including videos that imitate real people, a technology sometimes called “deepfakes.” Protecting victims of these heinous privacy invasions is a legitimate goal. But good intentions alone are not enough to make good policy.
-
Jun 24, 2024 | 
eff.org | Hayley Tsukayama |India McKinney
Protecting people's privacy is the first step we should take to create meaningful online regulation. That's why EFF has previously expressed concerns about the American Privacy Rights Act (APRA) which, rather than set up strong protections, instead freezes consumer data privacy protections in place, preempts existing state laws, and would prevent states from creating stronger protections in the future.
-
Dec 20, 2023 | 
progressivehub.net | India McKinney
While it is frustrating that Congress ignored the urgent need for significant Section 702 reform before the December 31 deadline, reform advocates should not lose hope. By India McKinney, Electronic Frontier FoundationLike the weather rapidly getting colder outside, the fight over renewing, reforming, or sunsetting the mass surveillance power of Section 702 has been put on ice until spring.
-
Dec 15, 2023 | 
eff.org | India McKinney
Like the weather rapidly getting colder outside, the fight over renewing, reforming, or sunsetting the mass surveillance power of Section 702 has been put on ice until spring.
-
Dec 8, 2023 | 
eff.org | India McKinney
Earlier this week, both the House Committee on the Judiciary (HJC) and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) marked up two very different bills (H.R. 6570 - Protect Liberty and End Warrantless Surveillance Act in HJC, and HR 6611, the FISA Reform and Reauthorization Act of 2023 in HPSCI), both of which would reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)—but in very different ways.
-
Nov 7, 2023 | 
eff.org | Brendan Gilligan |India McKinney |Andrew Crocker |Matthew Guariglia
With Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) set to expire at the end of the year, Congress is considering whether to reauthorize the law and if so, whether to make any necessary amendments to the invasive surveillance authority. While Section 702 was first sold as a tool necessary to stop foreign terrorists, it has since become clear that the government uses the communications it collects under this law as a domestic intelligence source.
