Originally by ABC News: Politics, 9:14 PM
After a few corporate embarrassments caused by webloggers last year, certain companies look set to outlaw the practice — both at home and in the workplace. According to one recently-published book, an employer can do so by means of inserting new limiting provisions into employment contracts: Read more »
Originally by Wired News: DAT's Entertainment, 10:54 AM
Originally by CowboyNeal at Slashdot: Your Rights Online, 10:52 AM
Originally by WSJ.com: What's News Technology, 10:44 AM
Well, Google is certainly making the headlines at the moment. This time, a federal United States judge stated that he intends to order Google to divulge user search and email records to the United States Justice Department. Fortunately for Google (and its users), the judge appears to have accepted Google’s request to confine the terms of the disclosure to only a small subset of the requested data. Read more »
Cybersnooping legislation regulates when it will be permissible for employers to monitor the electronic activities — such as email, web surfing and outbound data transmissions — of their employees. Currently, however, the regimes adopted among the states differ widely, making it all but impossible for national employers to confidently establish a uniform monitoring protocol: Read more »
The Australian Federal Government has announced a review of the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth). Attorney–General Philip Ruddock says the Australian Law Reform Commission will look at existing laws and practices across the country and consider changes in technology since the Act was introduced in 1988. Read more »
'Tech-boom multimillionaire John Gilmore cut an appropriately iconoclastic profile last week as the centerpiece of a notebook-wielding gaggle in front of the 9th Circuit. A star of the electronic privacy movement, Gilmore has been at the [centre] of an increasingly strange piece of litigation for the past three years since he sued the government, claiming that the requirement to show identification before boarding a plane is unconstitutional.' Read more »