Gonzales and FBI Director Robert Mueller have discussed
the proposal with ISPs who have considered lengthening their
current retention periods on a voluntary basis to avoid
legislation. ISPs tend to oppose data retention laws because of the
increased cost and responsibility it puts on them.
"This is a problem that requires federal legislation," said
Gonzales at a hearing of the Senate Banking Committee. "We need
information. Information helps us make cases."
The Banking Committee was investigating ways of combating child
pornography and has also been looking into how co-operation with
credit card companies could help, as well as how ISPs could help
law enforcement.
"We have to find a way for internet service providers to retain
information for a period of time so we can go back with a legal
process to get them," said Gonzales.
Any data retention law would not preserve the content of
communications, only logs of email, internet and phone activity.
The telecoms companies would keep the data and it could be accessed
only by court order in the same way as a physical search.
A letter to Congress recently contained the support of 49 state
attorneys general for a law mandating data retention.
Data retention laws have been passed across Europe and earlier
this year a EU Data Retention Directive was passed. Civil liberties
groups often oppose the move, though, because the information can
be used for other purposes, not just for chasing child
pornographers, and because it could leak out of the telcos or
government agencies.
In Ireland a case has just been launched by TJ McIntyre of
Digital Rights Ireland. It believes that the Irish data retention
law is unconstitutional and that the EU Directive violates the
European Convention on Human Rights.
"If we're successful it will strike down the Data Retention
Directive and that will invalidate a lot of the data retention laws
across Europe," McIntyre told OUT-LAW. "We're hoping that there
will be a knock on effect. A ruling on the human rights case would
be very persuasive for national courts."
Disclaimer: We hope you find OUT-LAW’s content useful. It’s prepared by the lawyers at Pinsent Masons. Please remember, though, that it’s intended as general information only. It’s not legal advice. If that’s what you’re seeking, please
contact us. See also: our
full disclaimer
