Privacy – Page 11 of 19 – Pirate Party Australia

Pirate Party, Greens and others to hold pro-privacy rallies

Posted on July 4, 2013

In the aftermath of revelations that the US National Security Agency has been operating an extensive clandestine surveillance program known as PRISM, Pirate Party Australia and other organisations will be holding rallies around the country this Saturday in protest against the ever-growing surveillance state.

“As citizens of a democratic country, we must take care that our democracy stays strong, and that the relationship betweens our branches of government remains balanced. Secret mass surveillence by its very nature denies that balance because it prevents oversight,” said David Campbell, President of Pirate Party Australia and Senate candidate for NSW. “We must make sure that what has been occuring in the United States is not replicated here.”

The existence of such surveillance is less concerning to Pirate Party Australia than the fact that it was needlessly kept secret. There is speculation that Australian intelligence agencies may be implicated in the surveillance program or have had access to the data collected[1]. Last month, Senator Scott Ludlam raised a motion in the Senate to compel the Attorney-General, Mark Dreyfus, to describe the extent to which Australia had been involved in or aware of PRISM. The motion was defeated[2].

Pirate Party disappointed by National Security Report

Posted on June 25, 2013

Pirate Party Australia is disappointed over the report by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security which was released yesterday[1].

The report defers almost all decisions regarding implementing surveillance schemes such as data retention back to the Government, and does not go much beyond providing the Government with “common sense” recommendations regarding data security.

“Recommendation 42 has entirely handed the decision regarding mandatory data retention back to the Government,” said Brendan Molloy, Lead Candidate for the Senate in NSW. “Rather than seriously address the concerns brought to the attention of the Committee by Pirate Party Australia, activist organisations and leading academics, the Committee has instead essentially passed the buck straight back to the Government. The Committee also still seems to fail to recognise the fundamental issues surrounding retention of metadata.”

Pirate Party reflects on a disastrous week for civil and digital liberties

Posted on June 10, 2013

From revelations around bungled[1] and secret[2] Australian government censorship to explosive new details about the massively expanded surveillance apparatus of the United States, the people of western nations are being treated like citizens under an authoritarian regime, deprived of their right to know what their governments are doing in their names, under the auspices of ‘national security’.

As the world continues to learn the full extent of spying and surveillance by the National Security Agency (NSA) in the United States, questions must be asked as to whether Australians have been caught up in the surveillance. Further revelations now implicate the United Kingdom’s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) agency as participating in the PRISM program[3], an NSA program intercepting communications such as emails, photos and videos from the largest technology companies including Microsoft, Apple, Google, Yahoo, Facebook, Skype and more [4].

Australians have a right to know if and under what terms any Australian intelligence agencies may also have been involved in the PRISM program and whether their personal information has been compromised or surreptitiously accessed by foreign intelligence agencies.

Law Firm Attempts New Round of Shakedowns

Posted on May 24, 2013

Pirate Party Australia condemns news that Sydney law firm Marque Lawyers have demanded the details of Australian Internet users from Internet Service Providers (ISPs). Thankfully, ISPs have resisted the move and Marque Lawyers have indicated a desire to use the courts to pursue suspected downloaders, starting with preliminary discovery orders. This sort of approach is reminiscent of US-style copyright shakedowns.[1]

The iiNet ruling, while protecting ISPs from liability for the activities of customers, opened the way for this sort of predatory suit which had thus far not yet materialised in Australia, as groups like AFACT had been attempting to negotiate a deal with ISPs to deal with file sharing, which ultimately failed.

“Ambulance-chasing legal action does nothing to support content creators, who are the reason we have copyright. This kind of extortionate behaviour only benefits the commission based pay packets of opportunistic Lionel Hutz-like lawyers. It’s nothing more than an exercise in intimidation through litigation.” said Joe Miles, Pirate Party Candidate for the Senate in Victoria.

Pirate Party Australia opposes litigation of non-commercial file sharers. it is high time that sections of the content industry move with the times. Platforms like Steam, iTunes and the Amazon Kindle Store show how there is a thirst for legal, paid content when it is provided in a way that is convenient and timely.

Cybercrime Convention Ratification Leaves Lingering Concerns

Posted on March 5, 2013

The Council of Europe’s Cybercrime Convention was ratified by Australia on Friday, 1 March 2013[1]. Pirate Party Australia has previously criticised the Convention for being flawed in regard to the protection of privacy and personal data[2].

The Pirate Party notes that the Australian Parliament has already passed a comprehensive piece of legislation in August 2012 that complies with the requirements of the Cybercrime Convention. The pious-sounding Cybercrime Legislation Amendment Act 2012[3] includes the ability for a foreign country to ask Australia for a communication by an Australian if the crime for which they are accused carries the death penalty in the requesting country.

The current legislation could allow a country to gather data about Australian citizens for any crime with a penalty exceeding $100,000, or that carries the death penalty. Due to the loose dual-criminality provisions within the Act, this could potentially allow countries with blasphemy laws, criminal copyright provisions or laws against activism to access Australian data.

The treaty’s entry into force comes at a time when the Australian Government, with the support of various law enforcement agencies, is examining an extensive range of proposed amendments to national security and intelligence legislation and regulations. Included among these changes are the mandatory, warrantless two-year retention of the Internet communications of all Australians, the ability for law enforcement agencies to not only remotely access citizens computers but to also add software and other files to them, as well as penalties for failing to assist in decrypting encrypted data.