Res Communis Blog RSS

ISPL: Space Law and Policy Course for Students

Source – ISPL:

SPACE LAW AND POLICY COURSE FOR STUDENTS

ISPL is pleased to announce its first space law and policy course for students, to take place Saturday, 25 October 2014 in London. Our courses and seminars have enjoyed strong interest and enrolment from university students at all levels. In response, we will offer a one-day intensive series of lectures solely for students with an interest in these areas. The course will be held on Saturday to enable students to avoid missing their regular lectures and seminars.

No previous knowledge of space law or policy is required. Students in any discipline are welcome, including law, engineering and technology, government, business and commercial studies. They will receive a solid briefing in the sources of space law, an introduction to aspects of policy, and a wide range of other related material. There is no examination during the course, but there will be ample time for discussion and questions.

ISPL space policy and law courses are normally intended for high-level practitioners and civil servants. This is an excellent opportunity for those just entering their careers to learn about the current law as it applies to the increasing range of activities in space, and about the policies that underlies the legal regime.

FacebookTwitterGoogle+TumblrLinkedInEvernoteDiggSlashdotEmailShare

State Department: Joint Statement on U.S.-Germany Cyber Bilateral Meeting

Source – US State Department:

Joint Statement on U.S.-Germany Cyber Bilateral Meeting

Media Note
Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC
June 27, 2014
Share
The text of the following statement was issued jointly by the Governments of the United States of America and the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany on the occasion of the US-Germany Cyber Bilateral Meeting June 26, 2014.

Begin Text:

The Governments of the United States and Germany held a Cyber Bilateral Meeting in Berlin, Germany on June 26, 2014.

This third annual U.S.-Germany Cyber Bilateral Meeting reinforced our long-standing alliance by highlighting our pre-existing collaboration on many key cyber issues over the course of the last decade and identifying additional areas for awareness and alignment. The U.S.-Germany Cyber Bilateral Meeting continued and further expanded its “whole-of-government” approach, furthering cooperation on a wide range of cyber issues and our collaborative engagement on both strategic and operational objectives.

Strategic objectives include affirming common approaches in Internet governance, Internet freedom, and international cyber security; partnering with the private sector to protect critical infrastructure; and pursuing coordination efforts on cyber capacity building in third countries. The discussions of Internet governance issues focused on continued efforts to bolster support for the multi-stakeholder model for Internet governance, particularly after the successful conclusion of the NETmundial Conference in Sao Paulo, Brazil. The United States and Germany will continue their close cooperation on these issues as the preparations for Internet Governance Forum 9 in Istanbul, Turkey are underway, and as the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is convening the multistakeholder community to develop a proposal to transition the stewardship of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) function from the U.S. Government.

Discussions of the Information Society issues also included the preparations for the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Plenipotentiary Conference in Busan, Korea in October and the United Nations General Assembly’s 10 year review of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) focusing on development and continued efforts to realize a global, open, inclusive Internet for all. Additional strategic objectives included expanding the Freedom Online Coalition, and the application of norms and responsible state behavior in cyberspace, particularly as the UN Group of Governmental Experts is poised to start its next effort and building on the successful 2013 consensus report affirming the applicability of international law to state behavior in cyberspace.

Operational objectives comprise bilateral cybersecurity cooperation measures such as exchanging information on cyber issues of mutual concern such as critical information infrastructure protection and identifying greater cooperation measures on detecting and mitigating cyber incidents, raising awareness, combating cybercrime, and implementing the Organization for Security Cooperation in Europe (OSCE’s) confidence-building measures to reduce risk,

The bilateral meeting took place the day before the U.S.-Germany Cyber Dialogue, a multistakeholder event organized jointly by the German Foreign Office and the U.S. Department of State and focused on big data, privacy, security, economic innovation, and international cyber cooperation. The Cyber Dialogue will be hosted by German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier; John Podesta, Counselor to President Obama will also provide keynote remarks. A high level panel of both German and U.S. experts will discuss big data, privacy, security, economic innovation, and international cyber cooperation. Participants from government, industry, civil society and academia will have the chance to discuss these issues and provide input for potential solutions.

The U.S.-Germany Cyber Bilateral Meeting was hosted by Ambassador Dirk Brengelmann, Commissioner for International Cyber Policy and the German delegation included representatives from the Federal Foreign Office, the Federal Ministry of the Interior, the Federal Ministry of Defense, the Federal Chancellery, the Federal Ministry for Economics and Technology, and the Federal Office for Information Security. The U.S. delegation was led by Secretary of State’s Coordinator for Cyber Issues, Christopher Painter, and included representatives from the Department of State, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, the Department of Defense, the National Security Council and the Office of Science and Technology Policy in the Executive Office of the President.

Coordinator Painter and Ambassador Brengelmann agreed to hold the next annual Cyber Bilateral Meeting in Washington, DC in mid-2015 again in conjunction with a multistakeholder cyber dialogue.

ITU to assist in real-time monitoring of flight data

Source – ITU:

ITU to assist in real-time monitoring of flight data
ITU Membership calls for development of standards for aviation cloud
Geneva, 25 June 2014 – ITU has established a new Focus Group on Aviation Applications of Cloud Computing for Flight Data Monitoring. The group will study the requirements for the telecommunication standards to enable an ‘aviation cloud’ for real-time monitoring of flight data, including those for the protection, security and ownership of flight data and the technical mechanisms and policies to govern access to these data.
The formation of the Focus Group comes in response to the call from the Minister of Communications and Multimedia, Malaysia, Mr Ahmad Shabery Cheek in March 2014 urging ITU to develop leading edge standards to facilitate the transmission of flight data in real-time. Subsequently, an “Expert Dialogue on Real-time Monitoring of Flight Data, including the Black Box – the Need for International Standards in the Age of Cloud Computing and Big Data”, held in Kuala Lumpur, 26-27 May 2014 with the participation of airlines, aviation bodies, avionics and ICT companies, service providers, civil aviation authorities, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and other international organizations, issued a communiqué outlining a roadmap for the way forward.
Participation in the Focus Group will be open to all interests, including non-members of ITU, and it will work in close collaboration with ICAO, ICT solution providers, aircraft manufacturers, airlines and other standardization expert groups.
ITU Secretary-General Hamadoun I. Touré said that the call from Minister Shabery for an international effort to find solutions to monitor flight data in real time has been given top priority by ITU and its Membership.
“ITU has a long history of developing international telecommunication and ICT standards, policies and regulations and is offering to bring this competence to assist aviation,” said Malcolm Johnson, Director of ITU’s Telecommunication Standardization Bureau. “I applaud our membership for the urgency with which it is addressing this issue by responding so quickly to Malaysia’s call for ITU action.”
The new Focus Group will study advances in cloud computing and data analytics to develop use cases for the application of state-of-the-art data analytics and data mining techniques in real-time. It will develop technical reports to provide the foundation for standards-based aviation clouds. In close collaboration with ICAO, the envisioned reports will address questions surrounding the type of data to be transmitted and the periodicity and reliability of its transmission, as well as the mechanisms to enable data security and privacy and the prevention of data misuse. The reports will be the basis for the development of telecommunications standards providing security and providing interoperable and secure aviation cloud systems.
Note to the editor: ITU-T Focus Groups are formed in response to immediate ICT standardization demands, charged with laying the foundation for subsequent standardization work in membership-driven ITU-T Study Groups. Focus Groups are open to organizations outside ITU’s membership and they are afforded greater flexibility in their chosen deliverables and working methods.

Russia – Cuba Space Cooperation

Source – Space Daily:

Russia to consider space cooperation bill with Cuba
by Staff Writers
Moscow (Voice of Russia) Jun 23, 2014

File image.
The Russian government has introduced a bill that stipulates a ratification of an agreement signed between Russia and Cuba in the sphere of space investigations, the statement on the government’s website says.

“This is a framework agreement that defines the necessary principles, regulations and conditions for the development of bilateral relations in space domain; it also includes the issues of intellectual property security and of information exchange,” the statement says. . . . [Full Story]

H.Res. 643: Calling for further defense against the People’s Republic of China’s state-sponsored cyber-enabled theft of trade secrets, including by the People’s Liberation Army

H.Res. 643: Calling for further defense against the People’s Republic of China’s state-sponsored cyber-enabled theft of trade secrets, including by the People’s Liberation Army was introduced on June 25, 2014 by Rep. Steve Chabot:

H.RES.643 — Calling for further defense against the People’s Republic of China’s state-sponsored cyber-enabled theft of trade secrets, including by the People’s Liberation Army. (Introduced in House – IH)

HRES 643 IH

113th CONGRESS
2d Session

H. RES. 643
Calling for further defense against the People’s Republic of China’s state-sponsored cyber-enabled theft of trade secrets, including by the People’s Liberation Army.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
June 25, 2014

Mr. CHABOT (for himself, Mr. BERA of California, Mr. COHEN, Mr. COLLINS of Georgia, and Mr. CONNOLLY) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Select Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), Armed Services, Ways and Means, and Foreign Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

RESOLUTION
Calling for further defense against the People’s Republic of China’s state-sponsored cyber-enabled theft of trade secrets, including by the People’s Liberation Army.

Whereas the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has been labeled by the United States Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive as the world’s most active and persistent perpetrator of economic espionage;

Whereas the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives investigated the PRC’s major telecommunications companies and concluded in a bipartisan report released October 2012 that Chinese businesses Huawei Technologies’ and ZTE Incorporated’s provision of equipment to United States critical infrastructure could undermine core United States national security interests;

Whereas in February 2013, the President issued the Administration’s Strategy on Mitigating the Theft of United States Trade Secrets and stated, `We cannot look back years from now and wonder why we did nothing in the face of real threats to our security and economy.’;

Whereas Mandiant, a United States cybersecurity firm, reported in February 2013 that a cyber-hacking group it labels as Advanced Persistent Threat 1 (APT1) is based in the PRC and is likely government-sponsored;

Whereas Mandiant found that APT1 is known as Unit 61398 and is the 2nd Bureau of the 3rd Department of the General Staff Department of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) under the Communist Party of China;

Whereas Mandiant warned that APT1 is only one of more than 20 Advanced Persistent Threat groups originating in the PRC;

Whereas Mandiant concluded that APT1 has conducted a cyber espionage campaign since at least 2006, whereas since that time, APT1 systematically stole hundreds of terabytes of data from at least 141 companies in 20 major industries;

Whereas Mandiant detailed that APT1 focuses on compromising organizations in a broad range of industries in English-speaking countries and maintains an extensive infrastructure of computer systems around the world;

Whereas Director of National Intelligence James Clapper reported to Congress in March 2013 that the PRC remains one of the most capable and persistent intelligence threats;

Whereas in May 2013, the Secretary of Defense reported to Congress in a report entitled `Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China’ that in 2012, numerous computer systems around the world, including those owned by the United States Government, were targeted for intrusions, some of which were attributable directly to the Government and military of the PRC;

Whereas the Secretary of Defense asserted that these intrusions carried out by the PRC were focused on exfiltrating information through computer network exploitation (CNE) capabilities to support state-sponsored intelligence collection of United States national defense programs;

Whereas Director of National Intelligence James Clapper reported to Congress in January 2014 that China seeks to revise the multi-stakeholder model of Internet governance while continuing its expansive worldwide program of network exploitation and intellectual property theft;

Whereas Attorney General Eric Holder announced on May 19, 2014, an indictment against five hackers affiliated with the PLA for serious cyber economic espionage that victimized United States entities and stole trade secrets;

Whereas these five hackers were identified as part of Unit 61398 of the PLA;

Whereas the indictment detailed the threat from Unit 61398 of the PLA based in Shanghai in the PRC; and

Whereas this indictment was the first time charges were brought against state actors for cyber infiltration of United States commercial entities: Now, therefore, be it;

Resolved, That the House of Representatives–
(1) calls on the President to aggressively implement and coordinate the Strategy on Mitigating the Theft of United States Trade Secrets;
(2) calls on the PRC to end the practice of cyber-enabled espionage against United States firms and individuals and to cooperate in cyber security efforts with the United States;
(3) calls on the Department of Justice to continue to advance investigations into cyber espionage by actors originating in the PRC;
(4) calls on the United States Government to continue to condemn cyber-enabled espionage for the purposes of stealing intellectual property and trade secrets, pursue counter intelligence capacities, and prosecute such individuals should they enter United States territory;
(5) calls on the United States Trade Representative to estimate the loss from cyber theft, compile a list of actors that cause the most damage to United States firms by intellectual property rights theft and pursue a dispute settlement case at the World Trade Organization;
(6) calls on the United States Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive to update the unclassified report to Congress on Foreign Economic Collection and Industrial Espionage in 2009-2011 with information that includes the cyber threat from the People’s Republic of China against United States companies and critical infrastructure;
(7) calls on the Department of Defense to restrict military-to-military contacts with the PLA in compliance with United States laws, including the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65);
(8) calls on the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Homeland Security to expand warnings to United States companies about the broad scope of tools to illicit trade secrets used by actors originating in the PRC, including cyber theft, physical trespass of the factories or other facilities of United States firms, intrusion of computers, and use of Universal Serial Bus (USB) drives, money, travel, gifts, promises of employment, and social media;
(9) calls on the Department of Defense and the Department of State to provide briefings of the United States-China cyber-security working group meetings in 2013; and
(10) calls on Federal departments and agencies to expand cooperation with allies and partners to better coordinate defense against cyber threats.

Event: International Meeting on Space-Open Debate August 12-13, 2014 San Antonio, USA

International Meeting on Space-Open Debate, August 12-13, 2014 San Antonio, USA:

OMICS Publishing Group, the world leader for contributing its prominent scientific services by organizing more than 100 International Conferences across the world and managing 350 peer-reviewed open access journals in science, health, and technology. Furthermore, OMICS Group has been associated with hundred more International scientific and technological societies and associations. The potential supports from these International societies harness strong network and development with the scientific core. OMICS Group Meetings host presentations from eminent experts in all the relevant fields.

OMICS Group Conferences is organizing an International Meeting on Space-Open Debate (Space Meeting-2014), which is to be held during August 12-13, 2014 in San Antonio, USA.

Contained within space are both known and as yet still unknown particles; space being boundless within 4-dimensions know as space-time continuum in which objects and events have relative positions and directions to one another. The main aims and objectives of space meeting are to consider, to ponder and to debate on your favorite space related theories, space missions as well as other issues (eg space food) – making this the ultimate space debate.

Space Meeting-2014 will bring together astrobiologists, astrophysicists, astrochemists, cosmologists, aerospace scientists and other interested parties in pursuit of unraveling the mysteries of the Universe under one roof.

In this endeavor, we would like to take this opportunity to invite you to attend this International Meeting on Space-Open Debate as an active participant either as a speaker and/or as a delegate providing valuable input.

S. 2519: National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center Act of 2014

S. 2519: National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center Act of 2014 was introduced on June 25, 2014 by Sen. Thomas Carper:

S.2519 — National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center Act of 2014 (Introduced in Senate – IS)

S 2519 IS

113th CONGRESS
2d Session

S. 2519
To codify an existing operations center for cybersecurity.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
June 24, 2014

Mr. CARPER (for himself and Mr. COBURN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

A BILL
To codify an existing operations center for cybersecurity.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center Act of 2014′.
SEC. 2. NATIONAL CYBERSECURITY AND COMMUNICATIONS INTEGRATION CENTER.

(a) In General- Subtitle A of title II of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 121 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
`SEC. 210G. OPERATIONS CENTER.

`(a) Functions- There is in the Department an operations center, which may carry out the responsibilities of the Under Secretary appointed under section 103(a)(1)(H) with respect to security and resilience, including by–
`(1) serving as a Federal civilian information sharing interface for cybersecurity;
`(2) providing shared situational awareness to enable real-time, integrated, and operational actions across the Federal Government;
`(3) sharing cybersecurity threat, vulnerability, impact, and incident information and analysis by and among Federal, State, and local government entities and private sector entities;
`(4) coordinating cybersecurity information sharing throughout the Federal Government;
`(5) conducting analysis of cybersecurity risks and incidents;
`(6) upon request, providing timely technical assistance to Federal and non-Federal entities with respect to cybersecurity threats and attribution, vulnerability mitigation, and incident response and remediation; and
`(7) providing recommendations on security and resilience measures to Federal and non-Federal entities.
`(b) Composition- The operations center shall be composed of–
`(1) personnel or other representatives of Federal agencies, including civilian and law enforcement agencies and elements of the intelligence community, as such term is defined under section 3(4) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3003(4)); and
`(2) representatives from State and local governments and other non-Federal entities, including–
`(A) representatives from information sharing and analysis organizations; and
`(B) private sector owners and operators of critical information systems.
`(c) Annual Report- Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of the National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center Act of 2014, and every year thereafter for 3 years, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives a report on the operations center, which shall include–
`(1) an analysis of the performance of the operations center in carrying out the functions under subsection (a);
`(2) information on the composition of the center, including–
`(A) the number of representatives from non-Federal entities that are participating in the operations center, including the number of representatives from States, nonprofit organizations, and private sector entities, respectively; and
`(B) the number of requests from non-Federal entities to participate in the operations center and the response to such requests, including–
`(i) the average length of time to fulfill such identified requests by the Federal agency responsible for fulfilling such requests; and
`(ii) a description of any obstacles or challenges to fulfilling such requests; and
`(3) the policies and procedures established by the operations center to safeguard privacy and civil liberties.
`(d) GAO Report- Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of the National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center Act of 2014, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives a report on the effectiveness of the operations center.
`(e) No Right or Benefit- The provision of assistance or information to, and inclusion in the operations center of, governmental or private entities under this section shall be at the discretion of the Under Secretary appointed under section 103(a)(1)(H). The provision of certain assistance or information to, or inclusion in the operations center of, one governmental or private entity pursuant to this section shall not create a right or benefit, substantive or procedural, to similar assistance or information for any other governmental or private entity.’.
(b) Technical and Conforming Amendment- The table of contents in section 1(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101 note) is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 210F the following:
`Sec. 210G. Operations center.’.

Library: A Round-up of Reading

Space Law
White House Concerns Over Senate Budget Stance on NASA – NASA Watch

U.S. Government Cuts Hurt Space Industrial Base, National Security, Economic Competitiveness – The Space Foundation

Administration Opposes Funding RD-180 Replacement in Defense Bill – Space News

Shelby reiterates his support for commercial crew pricing language as Nelson seeks changes to it – Space Politics

ULA Fights To Change Perceptions, Accelerates RD-180 Deliveries – Space Policy Online

U.S. Opposes New Draft Treaty from China and Russia Banning Space Weapons – Missile Threat

Space and Missile Merger – Missile Threat

EXPORT CONTROLS: NASA Management Action and Improved Oversight Needed to Reduce the Risk of Unauthorized Access to Its Technologies. GAO-14-690T

Outer space: an integral part of the international community's global commitments on sustainable development – SpaceRef

House Approves RD-180 Replacement Appropriation As U.S. Readies More Russia Sanctions – Space Policy Online

Subcommittees Examine NASA's Struggle to Protect Sensitive Information – SpaceRef

OIG, GAO, and Congress Ding NASA on Export Control – NASA Watch

Gerstenmaier Praises NRC Human Space Exploration Report – Space Policy Online

The FAA Is Trying to Ban First-Person View Drone Flights – Motherboard

The "New" Canadian Space Procurement Path – Commercial Space Blog

Will U.S.-Russian Tensions Impact Sea Launch? – UPDATE – Space Policy Online

Research Center Launched to Combat Space Junk Menace – Space.com

Oregon District Court Holds No-Fly List Procedures Violate Due Process – Just Security

Global Space Governance Can Fuel New Business and Innovations – Space News

Russia begins its withdrawal from Baikonur in Kazakhstan – Behind the Black

NASA has a Problem with Unauthorized Access to it's Technologies – Space Travel

SPACE LAW AND POLICY COURSE (CPD) COMPLETED MAY 2014 – ISPL

Gerstenmaier: a “lot of good things” in NRC human space exploration report – Space Politics

Russia loses its only geostationary early-warning satellite – Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces

ESA makes space debris software available online = SpaceRef

NRC co-chairs reiterate call for national commitment and sustained funding for human space exploration – Space Politics

Aviation Law
AIRPORT FUNDING: Aviation Industry Changes Affect Airport Development Costs and Financing. GAO-14-658T

The FAA Is Still Sending Out Fake Cease-and-Desist Letters to Drone Pilots – Motherboard

UK Court Allows Passengers 6 Years to File 261/2004 Claims – Aviation Law Prof Blog

Academy of Model Aeronautics Responds To NPS Unmanned Aircraft Interim Policy – ANN

Unmanned Aircraft to be Prohibited in America’s National Parks – Directions Magazine

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY INFORMATION SHARING: Stakeholder Satisfaction Varies; TSA Could Take Additional Actions to Strengthen Efforts. GAO-14-506

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY INFORMATION SHARING: Results of GAO's Survey of Stakeholder Satisfaction with TSA Products and Mechanisms (GAO-14-488SP, June 2014), an E-supplement to GAO-14-506. GAO-14-488SP

Drone Pilots Are Gearing Up for a Fight Against the FAA's New 'Rules' – Motherboard

Guest Post: The Bigger No Fly List Problem – Just Security

Court Declares U.S. No-Fly List Procedures Unconstitutional – Aviation Law Prof Blog

The Latest No Fly List Ruling: A Very Big Deal! – Just Security

AVIATION SAFETY: Additional Oversight Planning by FAA Could Enhance Safety Risk Management. GAO-14-516

Cyberlaw
Email Harvesting: Repeated Emails From LinkedIn May Violate Publicity Rights – Technology and Marketing Law Blog

Steptoe Cyberlaw Podcast, Episode #24: An Interview with Paul Rosenzweig – Lawfare

The FCC Blasts ISPs For Not Delivering the Broadband Speeds They're Advertising – Motherboard

Net Neutrality Will Require Us to Shine the Light on Internet Providers – EFF

The data retention judgment, the Irish Facebook case, and the future of EU data transfer regulation – Concurring Opinions

Tor forced to reject 'major financial donation' due to U.S. law – The Daily Dot

Does familiarity with technology affect the way judges vote on privacy? – Concurring Opinions

Managing Risk in an Inhospitable Environment: The Restaurant and Hospitality Industries are an Alluring Destination for Cyber Thieves – Privacy and Security Law Blog

Department of Energy Invites Cybersecurity Comments – Privacy and Security Law Blog

Johann-Christoph Woltag, Cyber Warfare: Military Cross-Border Computer Network Operations under International Law (Intersentia 2014)

“Getting to Know You, Getting to Know All About You…” FTC Data Brokers Report Calls for More Industry Transparency, Regulation in How Data Brokers Use Consumers’ Personal Information – Privacy and Security Law Blog

Approaching the CASL: The Compliance Date for Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation Draws Near – Information Law Group

T-Mobile Uses Data Caps to Manipulate Competition Online, Undermine Net Neutrality – Public Knowledge

Canadians Don't Trust the Harper Government's New Cyberbullying Bill – Motherboard

More Details on NSA Tapping the Internet Backbone – Schneier on Security

Working with Our Global Partners to Advance an Open Internet – NTIA

US v. Ganias and the Fourth Amendment right to delete – Concurring Opinions

Steptoe Cyberlaw Podcast, Episode #25: An Interview with Ralph Langner – Lawfare

Big Data, Open Data & the Federal Agencies – White House Blog

Snowden-documents show no evidence for global mass surveillance – Top Level Telecommunications

Understanding Net(flix) Neutrality: Dressing Up Corporate Opportunism as Net Neutrality – TechFreedom

Aereo Update: Supreme Court Rules for Broadcasters! – CommLawBlog

Public Knowledge Statement on Supreme Court’s Aereo Ruling – Public Knowledge

SCOTUS: Without a Warrant, Police Generally Cannot Search Digital Information on Arrestees’ Cell Phones – Lawfare

SCOTUS: No Cellphone Search Without Warrant = Prawfs Blawg

Justice Roberts’s wit – Concurring Opinions

Cops Can’t Search Cell Phones Without a Warrant, Supreme Court Rules – Threat Level

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 4th Amendment and Cell Phone Case and Its Implications for the Third Party Doctrine – Concurring Opinions

The Supreme Court Killed Aereo, But the Future of the Cloud Is Wide Open – Motherboard

Supreme Court Sets Powerful Limits for Cell Searches, Fails to Protect Internet Streaming – EFF

Supreme Court Shoots Aereo Down – IEEE Spectrum

SCOTUS & Cell Phone Searches: Digital is Different – Just Security

Summary of the Supreme Court Aereo Decision – TeleFrieden

The Supreme Court just outlawed the future of TV – Salon

Decoding the Supreme Court’s Aereo decision: The future looks hazy for cloud computing – Salon

INFORMATION SECURITY: Additional Oversight Needed to Improve Programs at Small Agencies. GAO-14-344