Yahoo on NSA surveillance: No comment
 

Yahoo on NSA surveillance: No comment

Declan McCullagh / CNET | February 16 2006

Under cross-examination during a congressional hearing, Yahoo's top
lawyer refused on Wednesday to say whether the company opens its
records for government surveillance without a court order.

Michael Callahan, Yahoo's senior vice president and general counsel,
declined five times to answer that question from Rep. Brad Sherman,
a California Democrat who was probing whether the Internet company
had cooperated with the National Security Agency's domestic
surveillance efforts.


"It wouldn't be appropriate for me to comment," said Callahan, who
was testifying under oath. He added that Yahoo would "only turn over
information if it's required by law."
But Callahan refused to say whether a demand from the NSA--not
backed by a court order--qualifies as required by law.

No law or regulation prohibits Yahoo from answering the question. In
a survey published last week by CNET News.com, companies as varied
as BellSouth, Comcast, EarthLink and T-Mobile answered in the
negative. Rep. John Conyers, a Michigan Democrat, has posed similar
questions to those companies, and AT&T has been sued for allegedly
turning information over to the NSA in violation of privacy laws.

Sherman, who represents the San Fernando Valley near Los Angeles, is
a Harvard Law graduate who was known as a stickler for detail while
a lawyer in private practice. He's been critical of the NSA
surveillance program, and said last week that President Bush's
recent claims about terrorists planning to attack a Los Angeles
skyscraper were a political stunt.


Below is a transcript, edited for clarity, of Wednesday's exchange
that took place during a House of Representatives hearing about
China and the Internet.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------


Rep. Brad Sherman: Let's say you get a call from the NSA saying they
want you to give them a copy of all my e-mails. Can I rely on your
privacy policy that you're not going to give those e-mails to the
NSA unless you get a court order?

Yahoo General Counsel Michael Callahan: We would only disclose
information in compliance with law and our privacy policy.

Sherman: Does that include a court order or letter from the NSA?

Callahan: I wouldn't be able to comment.

Sherman: The attorney general says the executive branch, without any
OK from either of the other two branches, has the right to read
everything you have in your files about me. You might very well
agree?

Callahan: It wouldn't be appropriate for me to comment.

Sherman: How can I be a Yahoo user?... If you tell me you'll decide
later if a sheriff in some obscure county (that I've never visited
can obtain access to my files based on a simple request?)

Callahan: We only turn over information if it's required by law.

Sherman: An investigation from some county that I've never been to?

Callahan: If we were served with proper legal process, we would have
to give it.

Sherman: Sir, you're assuming the answer to the question and
pretending that's an answer. I'm asking you, as the chief lawyer
from Yahoo, is e-mail from some sheriff...is that a requirement that
you would adhere to or would you fight it in court?

Callahan: That is not something we would provide.

Sherman: How about if it came from the NSA?

Callahan: (I can't comment on that.)

http://prisonplanet.com/articles/feb...no_comment.htm

i have no comment on this post

no comment means of course we suck the gov nipple

So much for their privacy statement. No comments means "yes give give all your info to the feds." If they didn't they'd say no.

Exactly.

But they're unwilling to admit they freely hand over records since they know people would avoid their services like the plague.

Common knowlegde that all shit is monitor by government. Just legal formalities that get in the way.

yahooo suck

nothing that they care to share with the public