[WEB4LIB] RE: FBI to monitor libraries

[James Cayz]

On Fri, 31 May 2002, Andrew K. Pace wrote:
>ALA Code of Ethics
>III.
>We protect each library user's right to privacy and confidentiality with
>respect to information sought or received and resources consulted,
>borrowed, acquired or transmitted.
>
>I don't care much about what any court has said.  This is what my profession
>holds me to.
>*Anyone* should have a reasonable expectation of privacy for *anything* they do
>in a library.
>We should know this in our sleep,
>Andrew

All,

I don't know if this is contradictory or not:
(from http://www.ala.org/pio/crisis/qa.html )
" Libraries should have in place procedures for working with law
enforcement officers when a subpoena or other legal order for records is
made. Libraries will cooperate expeditiously with law enforcement within
the framework of state law. "

To their credit, the FBI (or at least Delaware's Field Office),
understands our position very well.

It is within the realm of several federal agencies to come in with 
a Search Warrent, and seize equipment.

However, they realize we are one of few "public outlets" for the public to
give and get information about the government, and they don't want to
jeapordize that by doing things that would effectively shut us down.

Unfortunately, I've had a post-9/11 investigation.  I handled it the same
way as I had pre-9/11, stating the state FOIA and librarian privacy
concerns, and the FBI agent had *no*problem* with having to get the
appropriate Court Order.  As a matter of fact, she suggested it even
before I said I would *need* one, and actually volunteered to drive it
down to me (50 miles) - I graciously accepted a fax, since it was well
after standard quitting time.

However, and this is a BIG however, it was clear to me that if I wasn't
able or decided not to comply, that the Search Order would follow. I
wasn't sure that a certain type of database query could be done; she said
that if I couldn't get it in a reasonable time, she was sure the FBI
computer guys *could*.  I figured I better try harder, and grabbed a 2
liter bottle of Coke....

And when the Court Order lands in the fax tray within 5 minutes of getting
off the phone with the agent, I was sure that a Search Order wouldn't
take much longer if I didn't at least try.

So, as many people have discovered when dealing with the local patrol
officer, when the FBI or Secret Service come calling, be nice, courteous,
tell them your concerns and your needs, and everyone goes home happy.

>> I don't know of a single case in which the Supreme Court (or lower) has
>> ruled that there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in the use of a
>> public computer.

Delaware Law has been interpreted to indeed protect library computer use.
The law (Title 29, Chap 100, Section 10002) excludes the following from 
being a public record:
"(12) Any records of a public library which contain the identity of the
user and the books, documents, films, recordings or other property of
the library that the patron has used."

Certainly, the public computers are the property of the library.
The record of their use does include the identity of the user and the
use of that property.  Therefore computer sign-in sheets, on-line 
authentication, and any history logs that might exist on a specific
machine ARE private records of the library, and a Court Order must be
obtained to get them.

So, although a Court has never challenged our policy or the law, it *is* a
law, and so far, no challenges to the law have been made.  I guess if you
have a need to get the information, getting a Court Order isn't all that
hard.

We *do* live in interesting times.

James

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| James Cayz          Telecommunications / Network Technologist I          |
| Email:cayz at lib.de.us     Voice:302-739-4748 x130      Fax:302-739-6787   |
| Delaware Division of Libraries # 43 S. DuPont Hwy / Dover, DE 19901-7430 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+