The USA Freedom Act: What's to Come and What You Need to Know

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/11/usa-freedom-act-week-whats-come-and-what-you-need-know

by sinak • 12 years ago

180 45 12 years ago

eff.org

dmix• 12 years ago

This is pretty light on details.

Is there a TLDR of the changes around? Post-water-down version ideally.

RoundCube• 12 years ago

https://www.leahy.senate.gov/download/usa-freedom-act-two-pa...

jessaustin• 12 years ago

Wow a bill that isn't the exact opposite of what its name would imply. Admittedly I was not encouraged when I saw the phrase "USA Freedom".

lazaroclapp• 12 years ago

"Under the bill, Internet and telecommunications companies are allowed to report publicly an estimate of: (1) the number of FISA orders and NSLs received; (2) the number of such orders and NSLs complied with; and (3) the number of users or accounts on whom information was demanded under the orders and letters."

Is it just me, or the last one is a pretty big deal? Since before, "number of NSLs" could include a single letter asking for all the data on all users or really large sets of accounts. Of course, there is still always the typical loophole of "oh, it wasn't an NSL, it was data collected under a different program...", but otherwise this bill does seem to address a lot of the issues with NSA collection happening at completely secret rates, based on secret law interpreted by secret courts. Am I being too optimistic about it?

diminoten5• 12 years ago

Yeah, because the EFF is going to be unbiased when it comes to explaining legislation.

I'm so sick of how partisan the EFF has become.

drjesusphd• 12 years ago

Taking a stand on an issue is not the same thing as partisianship.

deciplex2• 12 years ago

As opposed to...?

I guess you are expecting the EFF to be neutral with regard to NSA snooping and data collection, versus NSA not doing any of those things. That's not a reasonable ask, though.

diminoten5• 12 years ago

I'm just expecting honesty, is all. I don't feel the EFF is honest in its approach to its stances, and that makes me worry that their positions aren't defensible.

crusso• 12 years ago

What does "unbiased" mean in the context of a group that has a stated advocacy purpose?

Why would we expect or want anything else?

You're free to act or not upon the EFF's urging - but at least they're honest about their goals.

diminoten5• 12 years ago

They misrepresent views and lie about legislation.

What's honest about that?

bgentry2• 12 years ago

I don't think the EFF has adequately answered the concerns raised by Marcy Wheeler about the risks and weaknesses of this bill: https://www.emptywheel.net/2014/11/12/why-i-dont-support-usa...

sinak• 12 years ago

If I'm not mistaken, this is EFF's latest analysis of the bill, as well as their justification for supporting:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/08/understanding-new-usa-...

The bill isn't perfect, but it'll mean that the government collects less information on innocent people, there'll be greater transparency, and an advocate for citizen privacy in the FISA court. Beyond that, it's the most likely vehicle for NSA reform. We're unlikely to see anything stronger if this doesn't pass. And it seems like a better bet than trying to push for Section 215 to sunset next year.

bgentry2• 12 years ago

As per the article I linked, it also likely nullifies the Klayman case, a case which could very likely turn out to have an even bigger effect than this bill.

calinet63• 12 years ago

This page, content-wise, doesn't appear to have a clear message.

EFF -- if you're listening -- it would be great to stake a very clear position on this bill at the very top of your statement.

Something like "We urge you to support the USA Freedom Act."

Since neither the name of the bill itself, nor anything on the page, makes it clear that the "Freedom Act" is an act against the digital surveillance of US citizens, someone who had never heard of the Act, or someone skimming the page, would not gain a meaningful conclusion.

I was unsure at first whether to support or decry the bill, and heck, the name even sounds like "Patriot Act." The title of the page itself does no help: it paints an ominous message in a severe tone.

Marketing: it's important. Be clear.

"The signals we give—yes, or no, or maybe— should be clear; the darkness around us is deep."

William Stafford -- http://williamstafford.org/spoems/pages/ritual.html

xnxn• 12 years ago

the "Freedom Act" is an act against the digital surveillance of US citizens

This was a revelation to me, so I would have to agree. I'm ignorant of the subject and my initial reaction to a thing called the USA Freedom Act was "great, how are my rights about to be curtailed now?"

001sky2• 12 years ago

"Freedom act takes on Patriot act"

--News at 11

Clear as mud.

ma2rten• 12 years ago

The first sentences are:

"The USA Freedom Act, the leading contender for NSA reform, is set for a vote this week. The bill has some problems, but is a major step forward for surveillance reform. That's why we're asking you to call your Senator and urge them to support the USA Freedom Act."

How much more clear do you want it?

calinet63• 12 years ago

A great deal.

willidiots• 12 years ago

I actually agree w/ OP, the message seemed totally unclear to me, and I never saw that initial sentence.

I revisited the page and realized my eye was immediately drawn to the huge propaganda eagle, after which I jumped to the middle of the article and started skimming. Once again I missed the initial sentence. Had to intentionally look for it.

burkaman• 12 years ago

The point is to catch the eye of people who are just scanning the page. The first thing they'll see is the "TAKE ACTION NOW, Oppose NSA spying!" picture, which sort of leads you to believe this is another PATRIOT act or something. I can imagine someone seeing that, thinking "Not again, this stuff is endless, my senator never responds to my calls anyway", and closing the page.

Obviously ideally people will read past the biggest font on the page, but that doesn't always happen.

saraid2162• 12 years ago

The HN title, which is all I've read so far, leads me to believe this is another Patriot Act. Clicking through, it appears this is also the title of the article, so it's hardly HN trying to editorialize.

Since I have enough information to determine that I don't want the Freedom Act to pass, why would I click through to the article?

apendleton• 12 years ago

The bill isn't all it's cracked up to be. It creates new legal basis for some surveillance activities that are arguably illegal, immunizes companies who participate in mass surveillance, and (most problematically), reauthorizes the Patriot Act. See: http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2014/09/15/sunlight-ellsb...

Rapzid• 12 years ago

I've noticed this quite a bit recently.. Maybe I'm just older and it has being going on forever. Bills on the surface that look like they are accomplishing what you want, but when you read between the lines they actually give the nod to stuff you don't want to be happening at all.

Secret courts? Advocate. Now secret courts are more OK because apparently we reviewed them and decided they are fine with an advocate. This just cements the status quo into our system.

coldpie• 12 years ago

Rome wasn't built in a day. Legislation is a series of compromises. Think of it more as moving down the field towards your goal against the opposite team, instead of just teleporting there. Specifically, this bill makes phone spying much more onerous, and critically increases transparency which will immediately curtail abuses and fuel further debate. This isn't the last word on the topic.

001sky2• 12 years ago

This is common strategy in propoganda.

colordrops• 12 years ago

Wait, why is a bill even needed? Aren't current laws and the constitution itself already enough? If they are breaking the law now, why should we believe they won't disregard the Freedom Act?

mcherm• 12 years ago

Because there are people of good faith who work at the NSA. They have been told by their losses that the programs they are implementing have been reviewed and are perfectly legal. If Congress makes a clear statement on the matter then that fig leaf will no longer apply.

The USA Freedom Act: What's to Come and What You Need to Know

Related Stories