Judge Calls FCC's Internet Wiretapping Arguments 'Gobbledygook'

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Chuck Brownstein <charles.brownstein () verizon net>
Date: May 8, 2006 2:56:41 PM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Judge Calls FCC's Internet Wiretapping Arguments 'Gobbledygook'
Reply-To: charles.brownstein () verizon net

from
http://www.informationweek.com/industries/showArticle.jhtml? 
articleID=187200892&articleID=187200892&sa_type=&section=industries&subS 
ection=News+By+Vertical+Industry

Judge Calls FCC's Internet Wiretapping Arguments 'Gobbledygook'

The FCC is in front of the U.S. Court of Appeals, attempting to  
justify its requirement that broadband and Internet telephony  
providers need to comply with U.S. wiretap laws to permit government  
surveillance.

By Reuters
InformationWeek

May 5, 2006 09:03 PM




WASHINGTON - U.S. telecommunications regulators Friday faced tough  
questioning from a federal appeals court about whether the government  
can force broadband Internet service providers to give law enforcment  
authorities access for surveillance purposes.

One of the three judges hearing the case called the government's  
rationale for the surveillance requirement "gobbledygook," and  
another also expressed reservations.

"This is totally ridiculous. I can't believe you're making this  
argument," Judge Harry Edwards told the Federal Communications  
Commission lawyer.

The issue before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of  
Columbia is a decision by the FCC in August requiring facilities- 
based broadband providers and those that offer Internet telephone  
service to comply with U.S. wiretap laws.

The FCC has set a May 14, 2007 deadline for compliance.

Authorities are concerned that the growth of Internet communications  
could allow criminals to circumvent wiretaps by using e-mail and  
Internet phone service instead of traditional telephone services.

Private networks would not be subject to the wiretap requirements but  
those that are connected with a public network would have to comply  
with the law.

The FCC decision prompted an appeal by universities and libraries.  
The groups, including the American Library Association and  
Association of American Universities, challenged the agency's  
authority to extend such requirements to high-speed Internet services.

The groups challenging the decision note that the law contains an  
exemption for "information services." They say the FCC has long  
included broadband Internet in that category.

Judge Edwards agreed. And he scoffed at the FCC's argument that  
broadband Internet services included a separate telecommunications  
"component" that made it subject to the wiretapping requirements.

"Your argument makes no sense," Edwards told Jacob Lewis, an  
associate general counsel with the FCC.

"I'm sorry I'm not making myself clear," Lewis said.

"You're making yourself very clear. That's the problem," Edwards  
replied.

One of the other two justices on the panel, David Sentelle, expressed  
more sympathy for the government's argument, especially regarding the  
idea of extending the surveillance requirements to Internet phone  
service. But Sentelle also sounded skeptical about the FCC's position  
on broadband services.

The third judge, Janice Brown, did not question the lawyers.


By: Peter Kaplan



-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/