Aggregator

In a voice vote earlier this week, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 6028, the “Legislative Branch Agencies Clarification Act.” The legislation is presented as a technical reorganization of some government agencies, but it’s much more than that. 

H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office, and not in a good way. The bill removes the Library of Congress’ current supervisory role over the Copyright Office, transfers several powers directly to the Register of Copyrights, and makes the Register a presidential appointee, confirmed by the Senate. 

These changes would make an office that’s already hugely influential in copyright and tech policy much more political. EFF first explained why that’s a terrible idea when it came up nearly a decade ago. This bill, like the older one, weakens the few public-interest checks and balances that do exist.  We hope the Senate promptly rejects this bill. 

The Copyright Office Doesn’t Need More Politics—Or More Power

The Copyright Office's main responsibilities are administrative and advisory. It registers copyrights, maintains records, grows the Library of Congress’s collections, and provides expertise to Congress on copyright law. But over the past two decades, the Office has also become increasingly influential in copyright policy debates that affect free expression, libraries, educators, competition—and everyday internet users. Unfortunately, it has not been a neutral advocate. The office’s recent report on the role of AI severely bungled the issue of fair use, prioritizing private licensing market “solutions” over user rights. 

Going further back, the Copyright Office supported one of the most infamous anti-internet proposals of all time—the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), a disastrous internet censorship proposal that sparked one of the largest online protests in history. The Office has repeatedly advanced positions that favored large entertainment-industry interests over the public interest.

The Office also plays a major role in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) Section 1201 rulemaking process, which determines when the public may lawfully bypass digital locks for activities such as security research, repair, preservation, or accessibility. EFF has used this process repeatedly to mitigate some of the worst harms of the DMCA. H.R. 6028 would move rulemaking authority over 1201 from the Librarian of Congress to the Register of Copyrights, further consolidating power within the Copyright Office itself.

The bill also makes the Register of Copyrights a presidential appointee confirmed by the Senate. Each administration will be pressured to pick nominees aligned with their own policy preferences, and the powerful copyright owning industries will invest even more heavily in lobbying to get their way, and influence the selection. This position should be focused on administrative ability and actual expertise, not lobbying and politics. 

The Copyright Office Should Stay Connected To The Library of Congress

H.R. 6028 would do more than change who appoints the Register of Copyrights. It would sever the Copyright Office from Library of Congress supervision and transfer many Librarian powers directly to the Register. 

The supervisory relationship exists for good reason, as the nation’s libraries have pointed out for years. The Library, while far from perfect, at least has the mission of preserving and providing access to knowledge. That should be an important public-interest counterweight in copyright debates. Congress has not explained how weakening the ties between the Library and the Copyright Office would serve the public better, or even seriously inquired about it. 

This Bill Was Rushed Through

Back in March, EFF joined Public Knowledge, the Center for Democracy and Technology, library organizations and tech groups, urging Congress not to fast-track this legislation. We told them changes to the Copyright Office will have major consequences for the “speech rights, educational opportunities, and creative freedoms of all Americans.” 

Yet Congress moved forward without any hearings on the bill, and without meaningful examination. H.R. 6028 creates a years-long separation of the Copyright Office from the Library of Congress, transfers significant legal authority, and restructures the appointment process for the nation’s top copyright official. Changes like that deserve hearings, debate, and public scrutiny. H.R. 6028 got none of that. 

The Senate Should Stop This Bill

Copyright law exists to serve the public and “promote the progress” of science and learning. The institutions that administer copyright law should do the same. 

H.R. 6028 would move the Copyright Office further away from that goal. Congress should be strengthening public-interest oversight of copyright policymaking, not looking for ways to concentrate more authority in a single presidentially appointed official. 

The Senate should reject H.R. 6028. The Copyright Office should serve the public—not presidential administrations, and not industry lobbyists. 

税務システム等標準化検討会（第16回）

第146回産業統計部会

第765回　入札監理小委員会（開催案内）

令和8年度から新たに実施する電波資源拡大のための研究開発 に係る提案公募の結果

特定小電力無線局の無線設備の一の筐体に収めることを要しない装置、送信時間制限装置及びキャリアセンスの技術的条件等を定める件の一部を改正する告示案等に係る意見募集の結果

For months now, Congress has been kicking the ball down the road—temporarily postponing the expiration of the mass surveillance authority Section 702 of FISA in hopes that some consensus could be reached. Now, with the deadline looming, the stakes have never been higher. Nearly every time the statute has come up for renewal, the people demanding privacy and civil liberties have had to compromise, but with current negotiations seemingly at  an impasse, it’s time for surveillance maximalist lawmakers to come to the table. 

We say to the Intelligence Community crowd: Section 702 should require a warrant before the Federal Bureau of Investigation can look at digital communications collected from Americans. If not, we should let the whole thing expire.

This is a serious proposition. The intelligence community can keep a useful national security surveillance tool if and only if they make FBI agents get a warrant signed by a judge before they sift through and read out private communications. A warrant requirement is not the only demand EFF has been making for changing Section 702, but it is the most important reform and it should happen before there is any more reauthorization of the policy. 

For too long, the FBI has been able to piggyback on a major national security tool as an unconstitutional backdoor way of reading Americans’ communications. 702 collects communications going to, from, or between people in other countries—including when they are contacted by people in the United States. Mass surveillance is just that—mass. It’s lacking any of the individualized suspicion that our legal system is based on. 

Take action

TELL congress: 702 Needs Reform

So, what’s been happening?

On one side are surveillance hawks and intelligence community-devotees who think the mass surveillance of Americans is an acceptable, even valuable, product of this authority. This bipartisan coalition of privacy deniers think that 702 should be extended without any change, and they seem to be willing to let the authority expire rather than compromise with the lawmakers and public that are demanding common-sense reforms. They’ve been given a number of chances to pass bills that would implement some key incremental reforms, but those opportunities have not moved the needle. 

On the other side of the debate is a bipartisan coalition of people who understand that this authority can no longer operate as is. Section 702 is rife with problems, loopholes, and compliance issues that need fixing. The National Security Agency collects full conversations being conducted by and with overseas targets—including conversations by and with Americans in the U.S.—and stores them in massive databases. The NSA then allows other agencies, specifically the FBI, to access untold amounts of that information. In turn, the FBI takes a “finders keepers” approach to this data: they reason that since it's already collected under one law, it’s OK for them to see it. If the FBI wanted to get that data on their own, it would require them to get a warrant signed by a judge certifying that there is probable cause. Instead, under current practice, the FBI can query and even read the U.S. side of that communication without a warrant. What’s more, victims of this surveillance won’t know and have very few ways of finding out that their communications have been surveilled.

Complicating this matter more is that the Trump administration has announced Bill Pulte as the new Director of National Intelligence, whose job it will be to oversee and direct U.S. intelligence agencies. This is particularly concerning because of Pulte’s history of using private information held by the government as a political weapon. In his FHFA role, he has accused several of the President’s political foes and targets—including New York State Attorney General Letitia James, U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook—of mortgage fraud based on private data held by his agency. Because of his looming appointment, many Democrats have vowed not to reauthorize Section 702 unless he is removed from the position. They shouldn’t stop there—they should use that leverage to demand a warrant requirement. The integrity of the people in charge of a program should not be the only thing that stands between Americans and violations of their civil liberties. 

What happens if 702 expires? 

As the New York Times reports, “The law, however, has a built-in safety net for a temporary lapse that allows the surveillance program to endure until annual certifications issued by the nation’s intelligence court expire, though such a scenario could invite legal challenges. The court recertified the program in March, meaning the N.S.A. could continue to operate the program through March 2027 even if the statute were to expire.” 

If Section 702 does stay expired past March 2027, the United States government will likely revert to using other programs and authorities to justify the surveillance of overseas national security targets, namely 12333, a shadowy executive order from the 1980s that gives the U.S. government nearly unlimited power to spy on people overseas.  Even if this does come to pass, standing our ground on warrant requirements and allowing Section 702 to expire  is important for several reasons. First, just because the government continues surveillance under a different authority does not mean it is legally justified in doing so—this was the lesson of the post 9/11 Presidential Surveillance Program, which was only retroactively immunized by Congress. Second, seeing how the government responds to the end of Section 702 might give us opportunities to push for transparency in other parts of information collection and better understand how the inner workings of the intelligence apparatus pivot and adapt as new legal authorities take precedence. 

Where do we go from here? 

Every few years, for almost two decades now, we’ve been fighting to reform Section 702 so that it will no longer enable the warrantless mass surveillance of Americans. A bipartisan coalition in Congress supports this goal, but the White House and Congressional leadership won’t listen. It’s past time we make at least one serious reform to a mass surveillance law that has been abused for decades. Tell your elected official: Put a warrant requirement in Section 702 or let it expire.

Take action

TELL congress: 702 Needs Reform

There are no excuses for any Member of Congress to support a clean reauthorization of Section 702. Anyone who votes to do so does not take your privacy seriously. Full stop.

Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) is among the United States’ most infamous mass surveillance programs. Sold to the public as a foreign surveillance tool, it has become a backdoor for law enforcement to search through Americans’ private communications without ever obtaining a warrant. We need to act now to prevent Congress from reauthorizing 702 in a way that ignores the truth: This authority needs to change.

House Speaker Mike Johnson has attempted several times to push re-authorization bills that give us now substantive reforms. We will not fall for fig leafs or shifts in rhetoric. Our demands are common sense: no renewal without real reforms. A simple extension is a betrayal of every US resident who expects their government to respect their rights and the Constitution.

Your representative needs to hear from you right now, before the 45 date extension ends and Congress will need to vote again. Contact them today.

Tell them: No vote on any bills that would reauthorize Section 702 without meaningful reform.

米国・イスラエルとイランの戦闘を背景に、ホルムズ海峡周辺の船舶通航が不安定化する中、元職・前職国会議員や研究者、エネルギー事業関係者らが6月8日、衆議院第一議員会館で「ホルムズ独自友好交渉へ」と題する記者会見を開いた。会見には、小林正弥・千葉大学教授（呼びかけ人代表）、鳩山友紀夫元内閣総理大臣、境野春彦・コネクトエネルギー合同会社CEO、宮田律・現代イスラム研究センター理事長、竹信三恵子・和光大学名誉教授らが出席した。主催した「生活と平和」提言事務局は、日本政府に対し、ホルムズ海峡における日本関係船舶の安全通過を実現するため、イラン政府と直接かつ友好的に個別交渉を行うよう求めた。(岩中健介)

Enshittification isn't just a sweary word to describe the accelerating decay of the online platforms, apps, and services that we rely on.  

It's a framework for understanding the structural incentives that make tech companies enemies of their own users over time—the surveillance business model, the erosion of privacy, the monopoly power that eliminates alternatives, the regulatory capture that prevents accountability.  

SUPPORT EFF

GET LimITED EDITION MERCH + FIGHT ENSHITTIFICATION

These are some of EFF's core fights and have been for over 35 years. EFF sues. EFF advocates. EFF codes. And EFF wins. EFF is the most profound and powerful disenshittifying force on the planet Earth, and I’ve been proud to fight alongside them for nearly 25 of those years.  

One of the lessons you learn in battles with very long timelines against very powerful actors is that these battles are deeply serious, and because of that they must also be fun. “Enshittification” took off as a shorthand in part because of the minor license to vulgarity it confers. It's slightly crass for a reason: getting people to engage with the abstract issues of tech policy can be hard at the best of times. No one knows this better than my colleagues at EFF, who consistently surprise me with their ability to make complex, technical concepts concrete, memorable, and sometimes even joyful. 

Words matter, but so do visuals. For the cover of the U.S. edition of my book, Enshittification, designer Devin Washburn of No Ideas studio created an iconic variation of the "pile of poo" emoji, with angry eyebrows and a grawlix-scrawled censor bar over its mouth. It instantly became the symbol of enshittification I’d been looking for. 

I liked it so much I ordered a couple hundred enamel pins and a couple thousand vinyl stickers and handed them out to people I met on my 33-city book tour. Even when giving them away, I was inundated with requests to buy more of them.  

I've since bought out Devin's rights to the image and released it under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license—free for anyone to use, remix, or build on, including commercially, with attribution. The high-resolution files are on Wikimedia Commons, Flickr, and the Internet Archive (including a PSD with an ink-density adjustment layer). It belongs to the commons now. 

But I made sure EFF had first crack at the design for their “official merch,” and they've done right by it. There are two items available now in the EFF shop, and all proceeds go directly to EFF's work defending digital rights. I’ve spent years admiring EFF’s merch and consistent, creative visual identity, so it fills me with pride to see this more-than-a-mere-poop-emoji in their shop.  

A recognizable visual shorthand is a genuine organizing tool. When someone sees the enshittification emoji, they know what the conversation is about. When you wear the pin or slap the sticker on your laptop, you're signaling that you understand what's happening to the internet, and that you know we can do better.  

You can get a $5 sticker:

Or a $10 pin:

 

 Because the design is CC-licensed, you don't have to buy one. You can make your own merch, your own swag, your own illustrations. I made a lawn flag for my front garden.

 

But if you do want to buy a sticker or pin, you can do so while supporting the most profound and powerful disenshittifying force on the planet Earth—the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

SUPPORT EFF

GET LimITED EDITION MERCH + FIGHT ENSHITTIFICATION

 

Across the country, surveillance companies have spun a vast web of tens of thousands of license plate cameras. The people selling this tech want you to believe that it's for your safety, but how are authorities really using automated license plate readers (ALPR)? In this week's EFFector newsletter, we're looking at how these powerful surveillance networks have become universal people-trackers used for noise complaints and other low-level investigations.

JOIN OUR NEWSLETTER

For over 35 years, EFFector has been your guide to understanding the intersection of technology, civil liberties, and the law. This week's issue covers a victory for facial privacy, EFF's testimony to Congress about AI and surveillance, and troubling new examples of ALPR mission creep.

Prefer to listen in? EFFector is now available on all major podcast platforms. This week, we're chatting with EFF Associate Director of State Affairs Rindala Alajaji about what she uncovered about police use of ALPR. And don't miss the EFFector news quiz. You can find the episode and subscribe on your podcast platform of choice:

%3Ciframe%20height%3D%22200px%22%20width%3D%22100%25%22%20frameborder%3D%22no%22%20scrolling%3D%22no%22%20seamless%3D%22%22%20src%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Fplayer.simplecast.com%2F733a5637-dec4-4949-8c0f-976a5222c48a%3Fdark%3Dfalse%22%20allow%3D%22autoplay%22%3E%3C%2Fiframe%3E Privacy info. This embed will serve content from simplecast.com

   

Want to stay in the fight for privacy and free speech online? Sign up for EFF's EFFector newsletter for updates, ways to take action, and new merch drops. You can also fuel the fight against online surveillance when you support EFF today!

　大型連休の時期、民放でドキュメンタリーの力作が２本放送された。　まず、４月26日放送の日本テレビ『ＮＮＮドキュメント’26　なぜ山本美香は銃撃されたのか～伝え続けた戦場の声なき声～』。　ジャーナリストの山本美香は２０１２年、内戦下のシリアで取材中に銃撃され、亡くなったが、誰が何のために彼女を撃ったのかは不明のままだった。当時、一緒に取材していたジャーナリストで、山本の公私にわたるパートナーだった佐藤和孝は、シリアの独裁政権が崩壊し、再び取材できるようになったことを受けて13..

　日本弁護士連合会主催のシンポジウム「外国人差別から考える、　政府から独立した人権機関の必要性について」が５月15日に大阪市内で開かれ、インターネットを含めて約１５０人が参加した。 　最初に中島広勝弁護士が人権救済機能を […]

　茨城県は５月26日、外国人の不法就労活動の防止に関する条例案を６月議会（２～16日）に提出すると発表した。県労働政策課によると外国人の「不法就労」を防ぐ条例案は全国で初めて。 　同条例案を巡っては非正規滞在の外国人を雇 […]

　沖縄は５月15日、１９７２年５月15日（以下５・15）の「復帰」から54年を迎えた。同日から数日間、県内各地で開かれた集会で最大規模は毎年定例の県民大会で、今年は北谷町に約２０００人が集まり、玉城デニー知事も登壇した。 […]

　数々の重要法案の陰で高市早苗政権がメディア規制立法を着々と進めている。５月26日に衆議院で可決され、参議院に送られた個人情報保護法の改正案である。25年前、〝メディア規制三法〟の一つとして激しい反対運動の的となり、成立 […]

　男女の候補者数を均等にすることを目指し２０１８年に成立した政治分野における男女共同参画推進法（候補者男女均等法）の施行８周年を記念し、「クオータ制を推進する会」は５月22日、衆議院第二議員会館で集会を開催。各党議員らも […]

「おたくの地区、スパイが多いから、たいへんでしょう」。ぎょっとした。「スパイって、どういうことですか」「ほら、あの共産党の事件よ」 　13年前、自治会の役員になった最初の会合の帰り道、年上の女性からかけられた言葉だ。彼女 […]

　法務省出入国在留管理庁（入管）が昨年10月16日、日本で事業を営む外国人経営者に必要な「経営・管理ビザ」の取得要件を厳格化。従来は５００万円以上だった資本金の要件を３０００万円以上へ引き上げたことなどにより、各地で外国 […]

　差別にさらされているクルド人の人権擁護に取り組んだところ、インターネット上のヘイトスピーチで攻撃されたとして、在日朝鮮人の金英功弁護士が約７２０万円の損害賠償を投稿者に求める訴訟をさいたま地裁で起こした。５月20日に第 […]