<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

[IP] more on House hearings on CALEA





Begin forwarded message:

From: "sbaker@xxxxxxxxxxx" <sbaker@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: September 10, 2004 9:14:56 AM EDT
To: "'dave@xxxxxxxxxx'" <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Albertazzie, Sally" <SAlbertazzie@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [IP] House hearings on CALEA

Dave,

I testified for the Telecommunications Industry Association at this hearing,
and I made this point directly.  CALEA has an enforcement provision that
allows the FBI to sue any carrier for noncompliance.  But the FBI has to
show that the noncompliance actually prevented a wiretap, and a carrier can defend by showing that compliance wasn't reasonably achievable or the FBI could have gotten the information some other way. The FBI has never brought
an enforcement action under CALEA, which strongly suggests that it can't
meet the statute's requirements, which in turn ought to make us pretty
skeptical about any claims that heavy new regulation of the kind proposed by
the FCC is needed.

The testimony is on line at www.steptoe.com/publications/bakertestimony.pdf.

Stewart Baker

-----Original Message-----
From: David Farber [mailto:dave@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 6:58 AM
To: ip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [IP] House hearings on CALEA




Begin forwarded message:

From: Sean Donelan <sean@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: September 9, 2004 11:25:09 PM EDT
To: CYBERTELECOM-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: House hearings on CALEA
Reply-To: Telecom Regulation & the Internet
<CYBERTELECOM-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Of course, CALEA is not a wiretap law. Compliance with a court order for a wiretap is not necessarily related to compliance with CALEA. If there is no technical reason why carriers can not provide wiretaps to law enforcement,
what does CALEA change?

The FBI continues to decline to identify a single case where a carrier
refused to comply with a court order. If it has happened, why hasn't the
judge supervising the wiretap order found the provider in contempt of court?
Several years ago Earthlink challanged on order, but the
judge
ordered Earthlink to comply, and it did.

Is raising the spector the same as saying it happened?  Or is it just
imagination?


House subcommittee told carriers can comply with CALEA
by HEATHER FORSGREN WEAVER
Sept. 09, 2004 12:43 PM EST

WASHINGTON.There is no technical reason for carriers not to comply with the
digital wiretap act, a senior government official said Wednesday. [...]
"Unfortunately, when it comes to telecommunications technology, many
terrorists are not as primitive as their evil and demented worldview. In
fact, law enforcement raises the specter of terrorists exploiting perceived
technological gaps with respect to certain services for which
telecommunications carriers are unable to provide, or are unable to provide
in useable form, the content of communications or related information as
required by court order," said Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), chairman of the
House telecommunications subcommittee.

http://rcrnews.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?newsId=19536

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as SBaker@xxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

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

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

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