“The new type of surveillance court orders envisioned by the administration would require phone companies to swiftly provide records in a technologically compatible data format, including making available, on a continuing basis, data about any new calls placed or received after the order is received, the officials said. They would also allow the government to swiftly seek related records for callers up to two phone calls, or “hops,” removed from the number that has come under suspicion, even if those callers are customers of other companies.”
For some reason, that doesn’t sound like an end to bulk collection. Just a change in definition and venue.
“The policy message from the juxtaposition of these two hearings is clear. While copyright is important, it is not the only means of incentivizing the creation and distribution of works.”
“Carney condemned the Amash Amendment as a “blunt approach” that “is not the product of an informed, open, or deliberative process.” That was pretty funny, since Obama has been doing everything in his power to prevent ordinary Americans from learning enough about the government’s surveillance programs to decide for themselves whether they want to exchange their privacy for his promise of safety.”
I rarely say this as a one-liner but:
“The longstanding question of whether or not phone metadata collected by NSA includes geolocation data has been answered. “We are not collecting that data,” Inglis said, “under this program.””
This is the last sentence (of the update) but it’s all worth reading. Especially the original ending:
Asked by committee chairman Bob Goodlatte if the government really thought the massive collection of phone records could be kept from the American people, Litt replied, “Well, um, we tried.” The audience chuckled.