Fight for the Future

There’s a slew of misguided internet bills making its way through Congress and state houses right now and they all have something in common: harming marginalized communities on the internet.

EARN IT and CSAM replicates issues that we’ve already seen from SESTA/FOSTA by targeting companies that provide end-to-end encryption services. KOSA claims to protect children, but would actually hand conservative lawmakers in states that are criminalizing abortion and gender affirming care even more power to police people, this time through online censorship. The RESTRICT Act gives any sitting president unprecedented power to limit free speech online. All of these, along with multiple bills fencing off the internet from young people and those who cannot provide ID or age verification, paint a dire picture for the future of the internet. 

You can take action against all of these bills on one site: https://www.badinternetbills.com/

https://www.fightforthefuture.org/actions/tell-lizzo/

KOSA pretends to be about protecting kids online, but it does the opposite. It will put everything from LGBTQ+ online health resources to fanfiction on the chopping block. It strips teenagers of their right to a democratic Internet and puts so many marginalized kids at risk. Dove claims that KOSA is about body positivity, but Lizzo’s own body positive and feminist content could be blocked by KOSA. She needs to withdraw support. 

You can sign onto the open letter here: https://www.fightforthefuture.org/actions/tell-lizzo/

And sign our general STOP KOSA petition at https://www.stopkosa.com/

And you can read more about the harm KOSA poses to LGBTQ+ youth here: https://www.vice.com/en/article/g5v9b7/lgbtq-youth-are-under-attack-why-are-democrats-pushing-a-bill-that-hurts-them-even-more

The following statement on Sen Wyden and Rep Eshoo's letter to Big 5 publishers on ebook terms for schools and libraries can be attributed to Lia Holland (she/they) Campaigns and Communications Director at Fight for the Future.

"We are thrilled to see legislators taking action for the public's right to own and preserve all books, no matter what form they are published in. With so much of our lives happening online, the opportunity to own digital books is almost nonexistent—a stark and concerning departure from how our society interacts with paper books.

Through restrictive and expensive licensing schemes on ebooks and audiobooks, publishers are acting against the best interest of authors by reducing the number of titles that libraries and schools are allowed to offer and preserve. This often means that the most successful and mainstream books are the only ones purchased, locking many authors out of income from library purchases as well as away from the vast audiences of readers that public institutions serve. We hope that legislators will take swift action to ensure perpetual access to knowledge and diverse voices for everyone.

Today, the New York Times reported that Apple and Google removed an app from their Russian app stores under pressure from the Russian government. 

This is our statement on the news, which can be attributed to Evan Greer (she/her), Director, Fight for the Future:

“Today’s news makes crystal clear: Apple's restrictive and authoritarian app store policies are a human rights catastrophe. As long as Apple maintains a stranglehold over what software millions of people can and can't run on devices that they own, the App Store will continue to be a convenient choke point for government censorship and crackdowns on dissent.

While Android users will be able to circumvent this ban through sideloading their phones, iPhone users have no such recourse. Apple’s authoritarian app store policies make it easy for autocratic regimes to pull the plug on democratic initiatives. And by maintaining its absolute control over the App Store, Apple willfully puts its employees in harm’s way in these countries so it can continue squeezing app developers and consumers while contributing nothing to user security or experience. 

Apple's top-down monopolistic approach is at the root of their harm. Part of the reason they've received such massive backlash for their misguided proposal to conduct on-device photo and message scanning is that their walled-garden model would make it impossible to avoid, even if users knew that the system had been co-opted by a government using it to look for, say, protest images, instead of CSAM. When the world learned that spyware firms had exploited a vulnerability in iMessage to hack the phones of dissidents, iPhone users couldn't do anything other than wait for an update, because you can't uninstall iMessage from your phone.

Make no mistake, we are only in the early days of authoritarian exploitation of technology to consolidate power and crush dissent. Autocratic regimes will continue testing the limits of what they can get away with and how they can make Big Tech complicit in fast tracking their agendas. The only way to put an end to this — and protect the Internet, democracy, and tech workers in the process — is to allow sideloading and app store alternatives on these devices. And if Apple refuses to do so, then it’s up to lawmakers to force them to.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 13, 2021

Contact: Caitlin Seeley George, Fight for the Future: [email protected], 978-852-6457 Joe Mullin, EFF: [email protected] Albert Fox Cahn, Surveillance Technology Oversight Project (S.T.O.P.): [email protected]

Protesters with banners and signs are gathering outside Apple stores in major cities across the US, demanding the company commit to never implementing its misguided on-device photo and message scanning proposal 

The night before Apple’s much-hyped iPhone 13 rollout tomorrow, the company is facing protests at its retail stores across the US. Organized by Fight for the Future, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and a network of volunteers, the protests are demanding that Apple permanently shelve their dangerous proposal to install photo and message scanning malware on millions of people’s devices. The company already announced it was delaying the misguided proposal after widespread backlash from security experts and human rights experts. Protesters are calling on them to publicly commit to never implementing it.

Protests are organized in Boston, New York City, Washington D.C., Atlanta, Chicago, San Francisco, Portland (OR), Minneapolis, Aventura, FL, Tucson, and Houston. While Apple may have recently announced it would postpone the rollout of its scanning software, technologists, human rights organizations, and Apple users are unwilling to let up until it is fully cancelled.

SEE PHOTOS AND VIDEO OF PROTESTERS AVAILABLE FOR USE BY PRESS HERE: https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/19Stvm1FAusRHffVR4ngPfP2bi3qRWSHl 

Groups say that if Apple moves forward with this plan, it will have massive consequences—not only on the phones of millions of people, but on everyones’ ability to communicate without being under constant surveillance. As a purported champion of privacy, Apple should use its position in the industry to protect more people, including children, by encrypting iCloud and addressing security vulnerabilities in iMessage.

“Apple can’t just shove this horrible phone scan plan to the side in order to avoid bad press during its Apple Event,” says Caitlin Seeley George (she/her), campaign director at Fight for the Future. “If Apple moves forward with installing this software it would be a total game changer—opening up the door to unprecedented surveillance and forcing the entire communications industry to follow suit. We can’t let this happen, which is why people are showing up to call out Apple’s hypocrisy and demand it put an end to this phone scan plan.”

“Let’s be perfectly clear: you can’t be a values-driven privacy-focused company and an aspiring monopoly with authoritarian policies at the same time,” added Fight for the Future director Evan Greer (she/her). “Apple’s proposal to forcibly install what amounts to malware on millions of people’s phones is just the latest misstep from a company that already has a dodgy track record when it comes to human rights. Apple’s glimmering reputation as the good guys of Silicon Valley is crumbling. If they truly care about the safety of our children, and ensuring they grow up in a future where basic rights are protected, Apple should be expanding and strengthening encryption on their devices, not undercutting it. Listen to security experts. Encrypt iCloud and fix the vulnerabilities in iMessage. Publicly commit to never implementing on-device content scanning.”

“Users want the devices they have purchased to work for them—not to spy on them for others,” said Joe Mullin, a policy analyst on EFF’s activism team. “Delaying the program is a step in the right direction, but it is not enough. Apple needs to take the next step to protect its users and abandon the program.”

“Apple promises us privacy, but delivers surveillance,” said Surveillance Technology Oversight Project (S.T.O.P.) Executive Director Albert Fox Cahn. “This software will almost certainly make mistakes, and when it does, the results could be deadly, particularly for LGBTQ+ youth. Apple’s software can be hijacked by authoritarian governments in the future to scan users’ devices, giving repressive regimes unprecedented powers to suppress dissent. The same tool that scans for photos today could easily scan for religious or political texts tomorrow.”

Today a Federal judge announced a decision in the high profile Apple vs Epic court case surrounding Apple’s restrictive app store practices.

Digital rights organization Fight for the Future, who are behind AbolishTheAppStore.org and NoSpyPhone.org, and who are planning protests at Apple stores in major cities this Monday on the eve of the iPhone 13 launch, issued the following statement, which can be attributed to the group’s Director, Evan Greer (she/her):

“Unfortunately, this court decision does nothing to address the real harm of Apple’s restrictive and monopolistic app store policies. As long as Apple maintains an authoritarian stranglehold over what software millions of people can and can’t run on their phones, the company will be actively helping repressive governments undermine human rights and censor apps used by journalists, dissidents, and vulnerable communities. The bottom line is that you can’t be a values-driven privacy company and an aspiring monopoly at the same time. 

The scandal around Apple’s widely condemned proposal to conduct on-device photo and message scanning just underscores the harms of Apple’s monopoly. iPhone users can’t uninstall bundled software like iMessage even if they know it has serious security vulnerabilities. If Apple actually has any values, they should let users install and run whatever software they want on the devices they own, the same way they do on Mac laptops. If Apple chooses profit and control over user safety and security, and the courts won’t address the harms of Apple’s monopolistic practices, then lawmakers should.”

Fight for the Future and other organizations are planning protests at Apple stores in major cities this Monday, the night before the much hyped iPhone 13 #AppleEvent rollout, demanding that the company permanently shelve its misguided plan to conduct on-device photo and message scanning.

See a press release about the protests happening  in NYC, San Francisco, Atlanta, Chicago, Washington DC, etc here.

**Organizers say opposition won’t stop until Apple fully cancels plan to install spyware on devices**

Contact: [email protected]

As Apple prepares for it’s annual #AppleEvent on September 14, people across the country are organizing protests outside Apple stores for September 13 to demand the company fully cancel its plan to instal client-side scanning software on millions of devices.

Led by Fight for the Future, and with the support of EFF, protesters will hold banners, signs, and display messages on their phones outside of Apple stores. They’ll also deliver thousands of petition signatures and give statements about why they oppose Apple’s plan.

WHAT: #nospyphone Protests WHEN: Monday, September 13, 6:00 pm local time WHERE: locations tracked at https://www.nospyphone.com/#map VISUALS: Groups outside Apple stores in NYC, San Francisco, Boston, Atlanta, Portland, OR, and Washington D.C. with, signs and banners, presentation of petitions, interview protesters

Despite Apple’s recent announcement that it would postpone the rollout of its scanning software, organizers are still pushing the company to permanently shelve its misguided plan.

“Apple can’t just shove this horrible phone scan plan to the side in order to avoid bad press during its Apple Event,” says Caitlin Seeley George (she/her), campaign director at Fight for the Future. “If Apple moves forward with installing this software it would be a total game changer—opening up the door to unprecedented surveillance and forcing the entire communications industry to follow suit. We can’t let this happen, which is why people are showing up to call out Apple’s hypocrisy and demand it put an end to this phone scan plan.”

“Let’s be perfectly clear: you can’t be a values-driven privacy-focused company and an aspiring monopoly with authoritarian policies at the same time,” added Fight for the Future director Evan Greer (she/her). “Apple’s proposal to forcibly install what amounts to malware on millions of people’s phones is just the latest misstep from a company that already has a dodgy track record when it comes to human rights. Apple’s glimmering reputation as the good guys of Silicon Valley is crumbling. If they truly care about the safety of our children, and ensuring they grow up in a future where basic rights are protected, Apple should be expanding and strengthening encryption on their devices, not undercutting it. Listen to security experts. Encrypt iCloud and fix the vulnerabilities in iMessage. Publicly commit to never implementing on-device content scanning.”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 8, 2021 Contact: Caitlin Seeley George, [email protected] Matt Hatfield, OpenMedia, [email protected] Joe Mullin, Electronic Frontier Foundation, [email protected]

Apple’s move has been roundly condemned by security experts, developers, and civil rights groups.

In response to Apple’s plan to add surveillance features that will scan photos and messages, a group of civil and human rights organizations delivered petitions with more than 59,796 signatures to the company today.

The petitions call on Apple to abandon its plan, which goes against the company’s purported commitment to privacy and security, and its history of rejecting backdoors to access content on our phones. Despite Apple’s announcement to postpone its rollout of the scanning features, civil rights organizations say they will continue to oppose the company’s plan until they fully abandon it, because there is no safe way to conduct on-device content scanning.

The groups that circulated the petitions for today’s delivery—Fight for the Future, EFF, OpenMedia, Surveillance Technology Oversight Project (S.T.O.P.), Restore the Fourth, and Daily Kos Liberation League—as well as internationally renowned security technologist Bruce Schneier, highlighted how this would be a precedent-setting move, and say that once Apple opens the (back)door to this level of on-device surveillance, other tech companies may be forced to follow.

“There is no safe way to do what Apple is proposing. Creating more vulnerabilities on our devices will never make any of us safer,” said Caitlin Seeley George (she/her), campaign director at Fight for the Future. “Apple is able to propose this kind of surveillance because of its monopoly power and the stranglehold it has on the industry and our devices. But instead of undercutting encryption on devices, Apple should be strengthening it by fully encrypting iCloud and fixing the security issues with iMessage. This is how Apple should use its power to actually do something good for the industry and the world.”

Matt Hatfield, campaigns director at OpenMedia, added “Apple’s decision to embed image surveillance on our phones and iOS devices crosses a dangerous boundary that governments and bad actors will be quick to take advantage of. Any backdoor to our private data will face enormous pressure to be used for purposes besides those Apple intends. If they go through with this, the question is not if it will be misused, but when.”

“Apple’s device scanning isn’t a slippery slope; it’s a complete surveillance system waiting for government pressure to expand it,” said Joe Mullin, policy analyst at Electronic Frontier Foundation. “People, including minors, have the right to communicate privately without backdoors or censorship.”

Alex Marthews from Restore The Fourth, adds that “Opening the client side to surveillance for one purpose, opens it for all purposes. Governments cannot be trusted not to use this backdoor to broadly suppress categories of content they deem harmful.”

Today’s petition delivery will be followed by a day of protests at Apple stores across the country on Monday, September 13 (the day before the Apple Event). These events will further highlight the demand for Apple to fully abandon its plan to scan our devices.

Today, facing massive backlash Apple announced that it would delay the release of its plan to enable on-device photo and message scanning on millions of people’s devices, as part of a misguided effort to address CSAM. Apple’s “spyPhone” proposal has been roundly condemned by security experts, human rights groups, LGBTQ+ organizations, and civil rights leaders.

This is our statement on the announcement, which can be attributed to Evan Greer (she/her), Director, Fight for the Future:

"Apple's plan to conduct on-device scanning of photos and messages is one of the most dangerous proposals from any tech company in modern history. Technologically, this is the equivalent of installing malware on millions of people’s devices –– malware that can be easily abused to do enormous harm. Authoritarian governments already lean on Apple to censor and spy on their residents to squash dissent. This technology would make such surveillance essentially unavoidable on Apple products, and potentially every product if the industry were to follow Apple’s lead.

There is no overstating the threat that Apple’s proposal poses to privacy, security, democracy, and freedom. It would open the door to a future without human rights, privacy, or basic freedom –– a world where we can't trust the devices that we use to communicate –– a world that's not safer for children or anyone else. That's why there has been overwhelming backlash to this proposal from security experts, civil liberties advocates, racial justice groups, and international human rights experts. 

It's encouraging that the backlash has forced Apple to delay this reckless and dangerous surveillance plan, but the reality is that there is no safe way to do what they are proposing. Apple’s current proposal will make vulnerable children less safe, not more safe. They should shelve it permanently. Instead of undercutting encryption, they should be expanding it to protect more people, including children, by encrypting iCloud and addressing security vulnerabilities in iMessage.

"Apple would never have had the power to do this in the first place without their historically unprecedented control over the software users run on their own devices. We continue to believe that this is the root cause of the Apple problem, and must be addressed by forcing Apple to allow users to choose how their devices operate by choosing what software they run, including at the OS level. You can’t be a privacy company and a monopoly. Period.”

For immediate release: Monday, August 22, 2021 Press contact: [email protected]

Over the weekend, activists called out Macy’s for harvesting biometric data from children shopping before the school year begins. The action took place at the G Street Macy’s in Washington, DC and featured a mobile billboard calling on Macy’s to end its “creepy” facial recognition program and stop surveilling kids.

Photos are available for use here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1n59e5cdcMPlKYJmXW12rMnv8wNlcd2mK?usp=sharing

A reel of 4k video clips are available for use here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gUZ8jzDHMTw08OK2RS3xxW4fS_UmnQUA/view?usp=sharing

According to the scorecard at BanFacialRecognition.com/stores, Macy’s is the only major retailer that has confirmed and doubled down on its use of facial recognition, even as legislators move to limit or ban this invasive technology. Other back-to-school mainstays such as Target, Kroger, Costco, Gap, Burlington, and Staples have all indicated that they will not use facial recognition in their stores.

“Macy’s is flat-out on the wrong side of human rights when they use invasive surveillance technology to harvest sensitive biometric data on customers and their kids,” said Lia Holland (she/they), Campaigns & Communications Director at Fight for the Future, the digital rights group that organized the action. “Facial recognition is an experimental technology that is proven to disproportionately misidentify anyone who isn’t a white adult man and put them in harm’s way. We also don’t know whether Macy’s is selling the databases they collect on adults and kids—if a second grade back-to-school shopper has a meltdown in Macy’s, will that data be sold off and impact their school admissions or what jobs they’re hired for down the road? Will videos bbe handed over to police who might mark these kids as “risky”? No one, least of all children, can meaningfully consent to the ways this data might be exploited and abused.”

Macy’s is being under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act for collecting such data without the knowledge and consent of customers. Meanwhile, children are experiencing the harms of retailers and schools using facial recognition. Recently, a 14 year old Black girl was separated from her friends and kicked out of a roller rink after facial recognition misidentified her.

See the full list of retailers and whether or not they use facial recognition in their stores here.

For immediate release: Thursday, August 19, 2021 Press contact: [email protected]

The following statement is attributable to Lia Holland (she/they), Campaigns & Communications Director at Fight for the Future.

“OnlyFans deplatforming legal sex work is a perfect example of why we need an Internet with less choke-points for censorship.

Big Banks and payment processors should never be the arbiters of who or what can exist online, and it’s disturbing that in the year 2021 these behemoth monopolies are still throwing their weight around to censor consensual, legal, online self expression. No corporation should be able to arbitrarily decide where and how we are able to spend our money, but that’s exactly what’s happening here.

OnlyFans is the latest to cave in a long, hypocritical tradition of prioritizing the moral concerns of major financial institutions by deplatforming the very people responsible for the website’s success: sex workers. Banning sexual content is not going to make anyone safer—in fact, it will put sex workers in harm’s way by eliminating a safer revenue stream for a lot of marginalized folks. It is laughable that OnlyFans would call this an “inclusive” move when it literally excludes the primary marginalized community that has been using their services to generate safer, sustainable income since its inception.”

The following statement is attributable to Cathy Reisenwitz (she/her) Writer, Sex and the State, and OnlyFans creator.

The following statement is attributable to Lia Holland (she/they), Campaigns & Communications Director at Fight for the Future.

“OnlyFans deplatforming legal sex work is a perfect example of why we need an Internet with less choke-points for censorship.

Big Banks and payment processors should never be the arbiters of who or what can exist online, and it’s disturbing that in the year 2021 these behemoth monopolies are still throwing their weight around to censor consensual, legal, online self expression. No corporation should be able to arbitrarily decide where and how we are able to spend our money, but that’s exactly what’s happening here.

OnlyFans is the latest to cave in a long, hypocritical tradition of prioritizing the moral concerns of major financial institutions by deplatforming the very people responsible for the website’s success: sex workers. Banning sexual content is not going to make anyone safer—in fact, it will put sex workers in harm’s way by eliminating a safer revenue stream for a lot of marginalized folks. It is laughable that OnlyFans would call this an “inclusive” move when it literally excludes the primary marginalized community that has been using their services to generate safer, sustainable income since its inception.”

The following statement is attributable to Cathy Reisenwitz (she/her) Writer, Sex and the State (https://cathyreisenwitz.substack.com), and OnlyFans creator (https://onlyfans.com/cathyreisenwitz)

Last night, a YouTube building in Los Angeles lit up with quotes from parents and educators whose children are being harmed by the company’s addictive features—autoplay and algorithm-driven recommendations. The message from these parents was loud and clear: the half-measures YouTube announced this week to curb how children are harmed on its services are not good enough.

As a part of the first mass-mobilization of parents to end child surveillance, more than 10,000 parents have signed a petition calling on YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki to make simple changes to protect kids who use the platform.

"It feels like seduction of kids, their minds and money," Judy in Clifton, VA said of her experience with YouTube. Her words were projected on the YouTube building. "I am appalled by YouTube's constant advertising and urging to watch the next video and encouragement to consume and buy more."

Photos of the YouTube Petition Delivery Action are available for use here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1i_ZXcDhbOPi99n57fqXShYP1lTz5Reo5?usp=sharing

The petition’s first demand is that YouTube “Set autoplay to be off by default for all kids content on YouTube and YouTube Kids.” YouTube announced this week that it would set autoplay off by default, but not for all content kids may like to watch.

Angela in Andover, MA spoke to the strain autoplay has put on her family, in the context of her son’s education: "School would assign a video on YouTube to watch at home, and if I didn't keep close tabs on it, he would be watching several videos in a row. No child is going to just turn off an endless string of videos like that. It's maddening that it requires me to yell at him to turn it off."

Emily in Gainesville, GA echoed Angela’s stress: "I put on YouTube for my kids thinking they'll just watch one video, but another one always starts playing. I can't turn it off, and...it drives me crazy. I'm a single mom."

Stephanie, an educator in Flagstaff, AZ, also signed the petition and spoke to the real impacts of autoplay that she sees in her classroom: “YouTube's autoplay of new videos stunts the kids' creativity because they don't have to think about what they want to explore next. While [YouTube’s] goal as a company is to make money, [autoplay] is not best for our children and the growth of our society."

The petition’s second demand acknowledges that at a rate of 500 hours of video being uploaded per minute, it is impossible for YouTube to meaningfully vet videos that are marked as being “for kids”. The petition asks that YouTube simply “End algorithm-based recommendations for kids’ content entirely.” YouTube’s recent changes do not address this demand at all.

"My sons have both been recommended Neo-Nazi propaganda on YouTube channels aimed at kids,” said Amanda, a parent in Walnut Creek, CA. Her experience of the harms of YouTube’s algorithmic recommendations were shared by several parents.

“One time my daughter was watching what she thought was Blippi and then some guy came on and started making fun of him and calling him gay,” said Emily in Lexington, KY, who went on to say that she stopped letting her children watch YouTube after that experience.

Will in Washington, DC spoke of his four year old daughter being recommended unboxing videos after watching science-themed content on YouTube Kids: "Now, she wants those toys, stuff that's not age-appropriate, because she saw them on YouTube. Why did YouTube have to show her that?"

Marianne in Des Plaines, IL, has experienced problematic YouTube Kids’ recommendations in the educational context: "In my PreK class, I was shocked to find out that the kids were laughing like crazy and dancing to a totally inappropriate rock video that had followed the move and freeze song I had on."

“What parents are asking for is incredibly simple: that YouTube stop with the half-measures and turn off its addictive features for kids content,” said Lia Holland (she/they) Campaigns and Communications Director at Fight for the Future, a privacy group which helped organize the action. “Currently, there are almost no meaningful protections for kids online. We’re watching Big Tech companies act just like Big Tobacco—aiming to profit off of addicting young people to their products while completely denying they are doing it. These companies have thus far shown they are incapable of behaving responsibly, and that legislative action to rein in addictive and opaque algorithms, paired with robust digital privacy laws, is the surest path to protect people from their invasive and harmful practices.”

Speaking of YouTube’s actions, this week, Justin Ruben, ParentsTogether Co-Director said, “This is an important step, and YouTube should extend it to all children’s videos, even if they’re watched on regular YouTube. But it shouldn’t have taken 18 months of pandemic and years of criticism to force this change. YouTube needs to take a proactive approach to making their product healthy for kids—they shouldn’t have to be dragged, kicking and screaming, into implementing partial solutions.”

"Parents deserve the right to make choices for their children who are too young to do so themselves," read the message from Annapoorne in Clinton, WA. "Stop putting money as your top priority and help raise kind, knowledgeable citizens.”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 9, 2021 Contact: [email protected]

Fight for the Future fought to defend small developers alongside a concerned global community until the fate of the cryptocurrency provision in the Senate Infrastructure Bill was determined. In the final hours, Sen. Toomey and Sen. Lummis requested unanimous consent for a new compromise. In their press conference to announce the compromise, the two Senators dodged questions about the privacy & security concerns highlighted by Sen. Ron Wyden. And ultimately, their compromise fell short of its goal to protect decentralized technology and failed to pass the Senate. The fight now moves on to the House.

Here’s our statement in response to the failure of any amendment to protect cryptocurrency in the Senate infrastructure bill, which can be attributed to Lia Holland, Campaigns & Communications Director, Fight for the Future (she/they pronouns).

“As human rights activists, we care deeply about the future of the internet and the digital lives of everyday people. Everyone has their own perspective on cryptocurrency for a wide range of reasons—ours is informed by a decade of organizing for human rights, privacy, and free expression. We want a future in which tech is decentralized and impossible for elites and governments to surveil and manipulate. Cryptocurrencies are both a testing ground and a foundational investment in the move to decentralization. That is why we stepped forward to launch #DontKillCrypto. 

The response to #DontKillCrypto, which sparked over 40,000 calls to legislators and over 10,000 tweets, is the largest we have seen since the height of the protests for Net Neutrality. This is a warning shot to legislators and regulators that the issues at hand aren’t simply about taxes—they’re about the United States’ ability to participate in cryptocurrencies and a decentralized future that puts the rights of people above the exploitative and manipulative business models of Big Tech. 

Policies that impact people’s basic civil liberties and rights in the digital age should never be tacked on to legislation like an infrastructure bill. 

The Senate did some things right here—including extending negotiations and agreeing in theory that small developers and volunteers working on alternatives for a better world should not be shut down by regulations they can’t comply with. But ultimately, the Senate failed the country today by passing unamended ignorant and harmful legislation.

We must protect the software developers who are trying to create alternatives to the Big Tech companies that are destroying human rights and democracy. Decentralized tech is one of the most promising future alternatives to the centralized Big Tech systems that are exploiting and manipulating their users to maximize their profits. Privacy & security are essential features of decentralization, promising a better, people-first internet. The secure, surveillance-free world that decentralization can offer is an existential threat to Big Tech, and threatens to dismantle surveillance capitalism entirely. We are proud to fight toward that end.

This statement can be attributed to Lia Holland (she/they), Campaigns & Communications Director at Fight for the Future:

“With the Cryptocurrency provision in the Infrastructure Bill, and now the Portman-Warner amendment, the White House and other key Democrats are digging in their heels on legislation that fundamentally misunderstands how cryptocurrency and decentralization works. In the process, they are supporting Big Tech, increasing carbon emissions, and punishing small businesses. Fight for the Future has helped over 15,000 constituents to call their Senators and demand that the Wyden amendment be passed to solve literally all of these concerns, and the misguided Portman amendment get a resounding no.

Decentralized tech is one of the most promising future alternatives to the centralized Big Tech systems that are exploiting and manipulating their users to maximize their profits. A Web 3.0 built on blockchain technology distributed among a vast network of individuals and organizations is an existential threat to the Web 2.0 surveillance capitalist system and many of its harms. It is disconcerting to see Democrats and the White House, who have railed against the abuses of companies like Facebook, Amazon, and Google, working ​​to target individual software developers who are trying to build better alternatives to those companies.

The Portman-Warner amendment is written to support only those who engage in environmentally shortsighted proof-of-work cryptocurrency projects—projects that the vast majority of those in the space are working to move away from in accordance with the urgent need to address climate change and reduce our collective carbon footprint. On the very day that the Biden administration rolled out new targets for electric vehicle manufacturing, they also endorsed this extremely harmful amendment—a slap in the face and perhaps a mortal blow to all those working so hard to create eco-friendly alternatives in the cryptocurrency space.

Finally, the original provision and the Portman-Warner amendment fundamentally misunderstand that decentralized technology is *decentralized*. The law as-written is completely unworkable, requiring many in this ecosystem to produce data that they never have and cannot get access to—by the very nature of the technology.

For Immediate Release Thursday Aug 5, 2021 Press contact: [email protected]

The Biden administration is questioning an amendment to decentralization & cryptocurrency regulation that would ensure surveillance requirements for big corporations would not crush small developers and innovators.

The Wyden amendment shields people like individual software developers or volunteers from expansive government surveillance regulations that they would be unable to comply with. Yet, the Biden administration is balking at the amendment while insisting that the provision as-written is not intended to harm small actors in the decentralization space.

“The Biden administration claims to be tough on Big Tech while going after software developers who are trying to create alternatives to it,” said Sarah Roth-Gaudette (she/her) Executive Director of Fight for the Future. “No matter how they try to spin it, the provision as-written is a win for Big Tech’s corporate control of the internet. The Biden administration should welcome the Wyden amendment, as it supports exactly what they have said they want the provision to do—regulating big corporations, not small innovators. It is fantastic to see Senator Portman, one of the original authors of the bill, recognizing that it had unintended consequences and supporting the Wyden amendment. We urge the White House to align their actions with their rhetoric and follow suit in the interest of a decentralized future where people have taken their digital power back from Big Tech.”

9000 digital rights activists and counting are flooding the Senate with calls in support of the Wyden amendment, which will ease reporting requirements for non-custodial entities in the crypto-economy. Decentralization advocates and digital rights activists recognize the original language of the provision that the Biden admin currently appears to support as a vastly over-reaching power grab that would mandate mass-surveillance of the entire cryptocurrency ecosystem, and potentially drive important structural elements out of the US.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Thursday, August 5 Contact: Caitlin Seeley George, [email protected]

**Amid rising public pressure, groups expanded the scorecard tracking some of the major retailers’ use of the technology.**

Campaign organizers updated the Ban Facial Recognition in Stores scorecard with more of the largest retailers in the U.S. This list now includes 53 stores total, including 32 that might be using facial recognition, and 17 that have confirmed they do not.

“Thousands of people are demanding that stores reject facial recognition, and the retailers are feeling the pressure,” said Caitlin Seeley George (she/her), campaign director at Fight for the Future. “None of these companies want to feel the backlash that comes from using this surveillance technology on shoppers and workers. We’re continuing to mobilize people to contact the new stores on the list and make sure they get the message.”

Bed Bath & Beyond, Dillards, Nordstrom, and Staples are among the retailers that have not clarified their use of the technology.

The new stores rejecting facial recognition include Gap Inc., Rei Co-op, Petco, Petsmart, Sonos, and Burlington.

Meanwhile, Macy’s doubled down on its position, contacting Fight for the Future to further confirm that it does use facial recognition, and would not commit to ending its use of the surveillance technology.

A disturbing example of the harmful impacts of businesses using facial recognition occurred recently when a 14 year old Black teen was misidentified by facial recognition at a Detroit area roller rink and thrown out.

See the full list of retailers and whether or not they use facial recognition in their stores here.