<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>USLegal Reporter &#187; Privacy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://reporter.uslegal.com/category/privacy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com</link>
	<description>Just another USLegal Blogs weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:47:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>NSA to Build $1.6 Billion Storage Facility to House Personal Surveillance Data</title>
		<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2009/11/03/nsa-to-build-2-billion-storage-facility-to-house-personal-surveillance-data/</link>
		<comments>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2009/11/03/nsa-to-build-2-billion-storage-facility-to-house-personal-surveillance-data/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 18:52:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dana Altman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[big brother]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Security Agency]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reporter.uslegal.com/?p=937</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The National Security Agency is planning to build a $1.6 billion storage facility in Utah to warehouse personal data. The giant facility will contain more than 1 million square feet of data center space. Construction is scheduled to begin in June 2010 and be completed by March 2013. The new facility is estimated to require [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The National Security Agency is planning to build a $1.6 billion storage facility in Utah to warehouse personal data. The giant facility will contain more than 1 million square feet of data center space. Construction is scheduled to begin in June 2010 and be completed by March 2013. The new facility is estimated to require as much electricity as all of  Salt Lake City. All forms of electronic data will be stored at the center, such as intercepted phone calls, e-mail messages, Internet searches and other communications intercepted by the agency.<span id="more-937"></span><br />
<!--more--><br />
The effort was publicly disclosed in early 2008 and is designed to bolster cybersecurity-related awareness and incident response across the federal government. Much of the effort remains highly classified. It is partly an effort by federal agencies to reduce their exposure to Internet-based threats by reducing and consolidating the number of external Internet connections across government.  Instead of having each agency manage its own Internet connections, the plan involves having a small group of  Trusted Internet Connection (TIC) providers administer centralized connectivity and gateway-monitoring services for federal agencies. Critics of the project argue that the collection and permanant storage of such personal data is not necessary for national security purposes and intrudes upon the privacy rights of citizens.</p>
<p>Sources:  <a href="http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_12744661">http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_12744661</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/07/01/nsa-plans-16-billion-utah-data-center/">http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/07/01/nsa-plans-16-billion-utah-data-center/</a></p>
<p><a href="http://gizmodo.com/5395095/the-nsa-to-store-a-yottabyte-of-your-phone-calls-emails-and-other-big-brothery-stuff">http://gizmodo.com/5395095/the-nsa-to-store-a-yottabyte-of-your-phone-calls-emails-and-other-big-brothery-stuff</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/11/01/nsa-to-store-yottabytes-of-surveillance-data-in-utah-megarepository/">http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/11/01/nsa-to-store-yottabytes-of-surveillance-data-in-utah-megarepository/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2009/11/03/nsa-to-build-2-billion-storage-facility-to-house-personal-surveillance-data/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Congress Considers Yahoo and Microsoft Partnership</title>
		<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2009/09/01/congress-considers-yahoo-and-microsoft-partnership/</link>
		<comments>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2009/09/01/congress-considers-yahoo-and-microsoft-partnership/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2009 20:25:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dana Altman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[behaviorally targeted marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Microsoft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[yahoo]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reporter.uslegal.com/?p=896</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yahoo and Microsoft have proposed a partnership in search and advertising, prompting legislators to review privacy issues in behaviorally targeted marketing practices that track users&#8217; activity online. Federal legislation has been proposed to allow users to actively &#8220;opt in&#8221; to programs that track their browsing. Currently, users to opt-out of behavioral tracking and few people [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yahoo and Microsoft have proposed a partnership in search and advertising, prompting legislators to review privacy issues in behaviorally targeted marketing practices that track users&#8217; activity online. Federal legislation has been proposed to allow users to actively &#8220;opt in&#8221; to programs that track their browsing. Currently, users to opt-out of behavioral tracking and few people bother to do so.</p>
<p>Yahoo reported that out of 140 million U.S. visitors to its sites in July 2008, &#8220;approximately 75,000&#8243; visited its opt-out page. Microsoft reported that out of 130 million U.S. visitors to its sites in August 2008, only approximately 1,800 opted out. eMarketer estimates that spending on behaviorally targeted advertising in the U.S. will quadruple to $4.4 billion by 2012.</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/planned-privacy-law-may-hamper-online-ad-industry-2009-09-01">http://www.marketwatch.com/story/planned-privacy-law-may-hamper-online-ad-industry-2009-09-01</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2009/09/01/congress-considers-yahoo-and-microsoft-partnership/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>D.C. Handgun Ban Amendment</title>
		<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/17/dc-handgun-ban-amendment/</link>
		<comments>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/17/dc-handgun-ban-amendment/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 14:40:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Della Sellers</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Civil Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitutional Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/17/dc-handgun-ban-amendment/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Washington D.C. City Council passed a temporary amendment to its handgun ban Tuesday to comply with the recent Heller Supreme Court decision. Under the new legislation, D.C. residents must submit to and pass a criminal background check, eye exam and ballistics test prior to receiving a gun permit. Residents must also limit the ammunition [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Washington D.C. City Council passed a temporary <a href="http://dc.gov/mayor/pdf/showpdf.asp?pdfName=7-14_Firearms_Control_Emergency_Amendment_Act-July14_DRAFT.pdf">amendment</a> to its handgun ban Tuesday to comply with the recent <em>Heller</em> Supreme Court decision. Under the new legislation, D.C. residents must submit to and pass a criminal background check, eye exam and ballistics test prior to receiving a gun permit. Residents must also limit the ammunition they carry to less than 12 rounds, and all firearms must include trigger locks or be stored unloaded and unassembled except when used for self-defense. The legislation characterizes self defense as necessary when there is a &#8220;reasonably perceived threat of immediate harm to a person within the registrant&#8217;s home.&#8221;</p>
<p>The temporary legislation expires in 90 days, after which further permanent gun legislation will be enacted.</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/07/washington-dc-city-council-passes.php">http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/07/washington-dc-city-council-passes.php</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/17/dc-handgun-ban-amendment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bush Signs New Surveillance Bill into Law, Lawsuit Follows</title>
		<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/10/bush-signs-new-surveillance-bill-into-law/</link>
		<comments>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/10/bush-signs-new-surveillance-bill-into-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2008 21:01:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>carrie</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Civil Immunity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitutional Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/10/bush-signs-new-surveillance-bill-into-law/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[President Bush today signed into law the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments Act of 2008. The legislation overhauls US wiretapping and surveillance laws. 
Most notably, the (FISA) Amendments Act contains two key provisions. One now expands the power of the nation&#8217;s intelligence agencies to eavesdrop on the communications of suspected terrorists under emergency circumstances without a court order, but stipulates that the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>President Bush today signed into law the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments Act of 2008. The legislation overhauls US wiretapping and surveillance laws. </p>
<p>Most notably, the (FISA) Amendments Act contains two key provisions. One now expands the power of the nation&#8217;s intelligence agencies to eavesdrop on the communications of suspected terrorists under emergency circumstances without a court order, but stipulates that the agencies must go through a FISA court in order to obtain permission to conduct routine electronic surveillance. Also, the bill provides retroactive immunity to telecom companies from invasion of privacy lawsuits brought by individuals concerned over the industry’s participation in warrantless surveillance under the Bush Administration.  </p>
<p>On the heels of the President signing the legislation, The American Civil Liberties Union, Amenesty International, Human Rights Watch, and other civil liberty groups filed a lawsuit in Manhattan federal court over concerns that the legislation threatens American&#8217;s privacy.</p>
<p> Sources: <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/07/20080710-2.html">http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/07/20080710-2.html</a>, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/10/washington/10fisa.html?bl&amp;ex=1215748800&amp;en=bfa61dce8f16e341&amp;ei=5087%0A">http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/10/washington/10fisa.html?bl&amp;ex=1215748800&amp;en=bfa61dce8f16e341&amp;ei=5087%0A</a>, <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1044211720080710">http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1044211720080710</a> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/10/bush-signs-new-surveillance-bill-into-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Senate Approves Surveillance Legislation without Amendments</title>
		<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/09/senate-approves-surveillance-legislation-without-amendments-2/</link>
		<comments>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/09/senate-approves-surveillance-legislation-without-amendments-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2008 21:55:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Della Sellers</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Civil Immunity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitutional Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/09/senate-approves-surveillance-legislation-without-amendments-2/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The US Senate Wednesday rejected proposed amendments to legislation that would amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act but limit civil immunity for telecommunication companies that participated in the government&#8217;s warrantless wiretapping program.
After President Bush threatened to veto any legislation that did not offer full immunity, the Senate approved the bill to overhaul eavesdropping rules and regulations complete with [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The US Senate Wednesday rejected proposed amendments to legislation that would amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act but limit civil immunity for telecommunication companies that participated in the government&#8217;s warrantless wiretapping program.</p>
<p>After President Bush threatened to veto any legislation that did not offer full immunity, the Senate <a href="http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&amp;session=2&amp;vote=00168">approved</a> the bill to overhaul eavesdropping rules and regulations complete with an immunity provision. The President is expected to sign the legislation soon.</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/07/senate-rejects-bid-to-deny-immunity-for.php">http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/07/senate-rejects-bid-to-deny-immunity-for.php</a></p>
<p> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/09/senate-approves-surveillance-legislation-without-amendments-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bush Threatens to Veto Surveillance Legislation if Amendment Included</title>
		<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/08/bush-threatens-to-veto-surveillance-legislation-if-amendment-included/</link>
		<comments>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/08/bush-threatens-to-veto-surveillance-legislation-if-amendment-included/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 20:01:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Della Sellers</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Civil Immunity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/08/bush-threatens-to-veto-surveillance-legislation-if-amendment-included/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Director of National Intelligence Jack McConnell and Attorney General Michael Mukasey sent a letter Monday on behalf of the Bush Administration to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid threatening to veto surveillance legislation the House of Representatives recently passed if the Senate approves a version with certain amendments. 
The Bingaman Amendment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act would eliminate the immunity [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Director of National Intelligence Jack McConnell and Attorney General Michael Mukasey sent a <a href="http://www.eff.org/files/DNI-AG-Ltr-07-07-08.pdf">letter</a> Monday on behalf of the Bush Administration to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid threatening to veto surveillance legislation the House of Representatives recently passed if the Senate approves a version with certain amendments. </p>
<p>The Bingaman Amendment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act would eliminate the immunity included in the compromise legislation for  participation in the warrantless wiretapping program by telecommunications companies if the Inspector General decides the government&#8217;s surveillance program was illegal. The Senate is scheduled to vote on the amendment and legislation next week.</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/07/bush-calls-on-congress-to-reject-fisa.php">http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/07/bush-calls-on-congress-to-reject-fisa.php</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/08/bush-threatens-to-veto-surveillance-legislation-if-amendment-included/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Privacy Advocates File Suit Over Cell Phone Tracking</title>
		<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/02/privacy-advocates-file-suit-over-cell-phone-tracking/</link>
		<comments>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/02/privacy-advocates-file-suit-over-cell-phone-tracking/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2008 19:52:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>carrie</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/02/privacy-advocates-file-suit-over-cell-phone-tracking/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Electronic Frontier Foundation and the American Civil Liberties Union have filed a lawsuit againt the Department of Justice over mobile phone records. The groups want to know if the government is illegally tracking the cell phone acitivity of Americans. The suit was filed yesterday in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
In their [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Electronic Frontier Foundation and the American Civil Liberties Union have filed a lawsuit againt the Department of Justice over mobile phone records. The groups want to know if the government is illegally tracking the cell phone acitivity of Americans. The suit was filed yesterday in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.</p>
<p>In their complaint, the EFF and ACLU said, &#8220;The information now in the public domain suggests that [the DOJ] may be engaging in unauthorized and potentially unconstitutional tracking of individuals through their mobile phones. Information pertaining to the DOJ&#8217;s procedures for obtaining real-time tracking information is vital to the public&#8217;s understanding of the privacy risks of carrying a mobile phone and of, more generally, the government&#8217;s expansive view of its surveillance powers.&#8221;</p>
<p>The ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act request last fall seeking guidelines and documents relate to tracking cellphone users. However, the government has not yet provided any information.</p>
<p>Sources: <a href="http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/gen/35874prs20080701.html">http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/gen/35874prs20080701.html</a>, <a href="http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/gen/35873lgl20080701.html">http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/gen/35873lgl20080701.html</a>, </p>
<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/idg/IDG_852573C4006938808525747A0049B6CA.html?ref=technology">http://www.nytimes.com/idg/IDG_852573C4006938808525747A0049B6CA.html?ref=technology</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/02/privacy-advocates-file-suit-over-cell-phone-tracking/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>House Passes New Surveillance Bill</title>
		<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/06/20/house-passes-new-surveillance-bill/</link>
		<comments>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/06/20/house-passes-new-surveillance-bill/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2008 20:11:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>carrie</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/06/20/house-passes-new-surveillance-bill/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The U.S. House of Representatives today passed a bill which will overhaul US wiretapping and surveillance laws. 
Most notably, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments Act of 2008 contains two key provisions. One would give the government ongoing authority to eavesdrop on the communications of suspected terrorists without first obtaining a court order. Also, the bill would give retroactive immunity to telecom companies from [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The U.S. House of Representatives today passed a bill which will overhaul US wiretapping and surveillance laws. </p>
<p>Most notably, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments Act of 2008 contains two key provisions. One would give the government ongoing authority to eavesdrop on the communications of suspected terrorists without first obtaining a court order. Also, the bill would give retroactive immunity to telecom companies from invasion of privacy lawsuits brought by individuals concerned over the industry&#8217;s participation in warrantless surveillance under the Bush Administration.  </p>
<p>The Senate is expected to take up the measure next week.</p>
<p> Source: <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.6304">http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.6304</a>:</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/06/20/house-passes-new-surveillance-bill/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lawsuits filed Against Identity Theft Company</title>
		<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/05/22/lawsuits-filed-against-identity-theft-protection-company/</link>
		<comments>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/05/22/lawsuits-filed-against-identity-theft-protection-company/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 14:48:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Della Sellers</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Advertising]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/05/22/lawsuits-filed-against-identity-theft-protection-company/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Customers of LifeLock, an identity theft prevention and protection company, have filed lawsuits alleging failure of the company&#8217;s promised services and protection. LifeLock charges customers ten dollars per month to help them fight their identity theft. Head of the company, Todd Davis, is known for disclosing his own social security number in advertisements for the company&#8217;s services. The lawsuits claim that Davis knew [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><font face="Arial" size="2">Customers of <a href="http://www.lifelock.com/">LifeLock</a>, an identity theft prevention and protection company, have filed lawsuits alleging failure of the company&#8217;s promised services and protection. LifeLock charges customers ten dollars per month to help them fight their identity theft. Head of the company, Todd Davis, is known for disclosing his own social security number in advertisements for the company&#8217;s services. The lawsuits claim that Davis knew his company could not provide the services it advertises as his own information has been stolen based on several instances where individuals have used Davis&#8217;s social security number, including applications for driver&#8217;s licenses and an online loan.  </font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2">An attorney, David Paris, is requesting that the lawsuits by customers in Maryland, New Jersey and West Virginia be designated as a class action. Another lawsuit has been filed against LifeLock for misleading advertising of its $1 million service guarantee, which allegedly only covers a defect by the company itself and in California by only one credit bureau.</font></p>
<p><font face="Arial" size="2">Source: <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080522/ap_on_hi_te/identity_fraud_flap;_ylt=Am5BdPEqtyPTcQptT5mMfcHZn414">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080522/ap_on_hi_te/identity_fraud_flap;_ylt=Am5BdPEqtyPTcQptT5mMfcHZn414</a></font></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/05/22/lawsuits-filed-against-identity-theft-protection-company/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MySpace Victorious in Anti-Spam Lawsuit</title>
		<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/05/14/myspace-victorious-in-anti-spam-lawsuit/</link>
		<comments>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/05/14/myspace-victorious-in-anti-spam-lawsuit/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 May 2008 17:44:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Della Sellers</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/05/14/myspace-victorious-in-anti-spam-lawsuit/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[US District Judge Audrey Collins awarded the online social networking site, MySpace, a judgment of approximately $230 million on Monday against Sanford Wallace and Walter Rines for violating state anti-phishing and federal anti-spam law (CAN-SPAM), resulting in possibly the biggest historical anti-spam award.
Wallace is known for his involvement in past phishing and spyware litigation. He and Rines were [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>US District Judge Audrey Collins awarded the online social networking site, MySpace, a judgment of approximately $230 million on Monday against Sanford Wallace and Walter Rines for violating state anti-phishing and federal anti-spam law (CAN-SPAM), resulting in possibly the biggest historical anti-spam award.</p>
<p>Wallace is known for his involvement in past phishing and spyware litigation. He and Rines were not present for the court hearing regarding allegations that they committed phishing scams on MySpace.com in order to obtain passwords and then sent hundreds of thousands of email messages to members prompting them to go to other sites where Wallace and Rines made money from sales and hits. Violaters of the federal law are liable for $100 in damages per violation, which can be tripled if the violations were committed willfully and knowingly. MySpace claimed that the violations resulted in costs to the company, complaints from its members and potentially caused harm to minors from adult sites referred to in the emails.</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.lexisone.com/news/ap/ap051408b.html">http://www.lexisone.com/news/ap/ap051408b.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/05/14/myspace-victorious-in-anti-spam-lawsuit/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
