FISC Says It Will Declassify Ruling That Forced Yahoo Into PRISM

from the how-much-black-ink-will-they-use-up? dept

Last month, we noted that, while it was known that a tech company had fought back against a surveillance effort by the government and lost, it hadn't yet been revealed who that company was. The NY Times then revealed that it was Yahoo!, and it involved whether or not Yahoo! would be involved in PRISM. Yahoo tried to fight it, lost, and had to comply -- but the details (of course) remained entirely sealed. It appears that's changing. Yahoo! has been asking the government if it can reveal more info, and eventually the government (at the very least) allowed Yahoo to admit that it was the party in the case. After that, Yahoo asked FISC if the ruling could be declassified, and the court has now told the government to review the ruling to figure out what can be declassified.
The Government shall conduct a declassification review of this Court's Memorandum Opinion of April 25, 2008, and (2) the legal briefs submitted by the parties to this Court in this matter. After such review, the Court anticipates publishing that Memorandum Opinion in a form that redacts any properly classified information.
Of course, given the government's history of over-redacting, I fully expect a document with a ridiculous amount of black ink applied (invest now in black ink!). However, I do wonder if this is part of the various FISC judges realizing that there's been a fairly strong outcry against their secret court with a big rubber stamp.




Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    Akari Mizunashi (profile), Jul 16th, 2013 @ 2:41pm

    What's disheartening about this is Yahoo was also one of the first companies named in "turning over" info to the NSA.

    Guess which side the public took when it came to Yahoo.

    Mayer should be vocalizing the unfair treatment the media touted with the company's role with the NSA.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 16th, 2013 @ 3:29pm

    [REDACTED] is just one big [REDACTED] of [REDACTED].

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    icon
    sorrykb (profile), Jul 16th, 2013 @ 3:42pm

    I think you're being too optimisitic, AC.

    It's more likely to look like the May 2013 response to the ACLU.
    www.aclu.org/blog/national-security-technology-and-liberty/what-government-says-when-it-says-nothi ng
    Or skip the article and go right to the released document: www.aclu.org/files/pdfs/email-content-foia/DOJ%20Crim%20Div%20docs/CRM-1.pdf

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 16th, 2013 @ 3:51pm

    I'm looking forward to seeing what's released.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    icon
    That One Guy (profile), Jul 16th, 2013 @ 3:56pm

    Re:

    If you want to get a sneak peak, just stick your head into a pitch black bag, while standing in a pitch black room, and you'll get a pretty good idea of what the documents will look like.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 16th, 2013 @ 4:24pm

    With luck...

    they'll issue a PDF with the redaction...an some sensible person will try highlighting the redaction and make the magical words appear.

    One can only hope.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Jul 16th, 2013 @ 4:24pm

    Re: Re:

    If they're not leaked to the internet in unedited form, that is. ;)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    icon
    Matthew Cline (profile), Jul 16th, 2013 @ 4:33pm

    Re:

    And then SCP-682 [DATA EXPUNGED], resulting in the loss of over 100 D-class personnel.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 16th, 2013 @ 4:55pm

    Re: Re:

    I'm more hopeful than that. I think we'll get an interesting glimpse into what the court's been thinking.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    concerned citizen, Jul 16th, 2013 @ 7:47pm

    Re: optimism

    why even bother going through the motions?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    icon
    Killer_Tofu (profile), Jul 17th, 2013 @ 9:27am

    How to un-redact

    how-much-black-ink-will-they-use-up?

    I don't know but I think once I have the electronic version up, if I put white out on my screen then that should counteract the blank ink and I should be able to see what the document says.

    Just make sure I get to see it and I will let you know.

    Provided OoTB hasn't already done this several times over and proved it won't work.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This