TSA Refuses To Provide Body Scanner Info In Lawsuit... Claiming Copyright Prevents Handing Over The Info

from the uh,-what? dept

Tue, Feb 15th 2011 9:39am — Mike Masnick

Last year, we mentioned that privacy advocates EPIC were suing over the TSA's decision to use the naked scanners at airports. Reader jilocasin alerts us to a bizarre update in that lawsuit. Apparently the TSA is refusing to provide specific evidence to the court first claiming that it was "sensitive security information," but also saying that it won't hand over the info because it's copyrighted material. Say what? This makes no sense. If it's US government documents, then it's almost certainly not covered by copyright. But even if it's a private company's documents and covered by copyright, there's nothing stopping it from being handed over to the court.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: copyright, tsa
Companies: epic

25 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

xenomancer (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 9:42am

Perhaps they're embarrassed the only relevant information they have is a manual with "place the human in the emitter chamber for 20 to 30 seconds or until given cancer, serve with an invasive pat down and a dignity sapping, condescending manner."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ima Fish (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 9:51am

"If it's... But even if it's"

The government would love to answer your question, but unfortunately the answer is copyrighted too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Matt (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 9:54am

Secret law
It's actually a secret law that allows them to refused, but it's so secret they can't even admit it's a secret law hence the somewhat ridiculous claims.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
AlexT (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 9:54am

But... but... copyright!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- AlexT (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 10:10am
  
  Re:
  The copywritten material in question is a loop of "Divinyls - I Touch Myself" which is preinstalled on the screening computer.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Berenerd (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 10:19am
    
    Re: Re:
    I hate you....
    
    ...now that song is stuck in my head...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Marcel de Jong (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 12:12pm
    
    Re: Re:
    copyrighted... it's not copywrite :P
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - TSA Screener, 15 Feb 2011 @ 12:31pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Its hsrd to sprll on keybords using only 1 hand.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Feb 2011 @ 10:22am

The old "where there's smoke there's fire" applies. If they are not wanting to produce this info, then there is a reason they are uncomfortable with being exposed.

Of course the judge could always view it in his chambers, separate from the court to decide, regardless of it's copyright status. It's amazing how many times copyright comes out as a reason to do things.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymouse, 15 Feb 2011 @ 10:27am

Can I copyright my penis, so when TSA takes their silly scan photos they can be sued for copyright infringement?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 15 Feb 2011 @ 10:34am
  
  Re:
  Make sure it is properly registered. That way you can get damages when the TSA starts selling images to augment their budget.
  Perhaps they would put it on their existing Puppy Gallery:
  http://www.tsa.gov/lawenforcement/programs/editorial_multi_image_0009.shtm
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Dark Helmet (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 10:34am
  
  Re:
  "Can I copyright my penis, so when TSA takes their silly scan photos they can be sued for copyright infringement?"
  
  Only if it's transformative and original, which is why I long ago replaced my biological phallus with a dual-tipped mega-wang made to look like it's wearing a Derrick Rose jersey....
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 15 Feb 2011 @ 11:11am
    
    Re: Re:
    I think the dual-tipped mega-wang Dark Helmet junk would fall under publicity rights and maybe trademark but not so sure about copyright.
    
    I bet if you added "On the Internet" you could manage to get a patent on it too.....
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 15 Feb 2011 @ 11:11am
    
    Re: Re:
    I just slapped a miniature Richard Nixon mask on mine.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Hephaestus (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 11:30am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      "I just slapped a miniature Richard Nixon mask on mine."
      
      Once a dick, always a dick ...
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Hephaestus (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 11:34am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Or was that tricky to do to your dick?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 15 Feb 2011 @ 12:13pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        It wasn't that hard.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - keiichi969 (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 2:44pm
    
    Re: Re:
    I can guarantee mine is both original, and it transforms.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- J.J. (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 10:44am
  
  Re:
  That might not be as stupid as it sounds.
  What if a plastic surgeon who designs their own implants go with this.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 15 Feb 2011 @ 6:05pm
  
  Re:
  No, your parents have to file the patent.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
V, 15 Feb 2011 @ 10:33am

Copyright...
But... think... of the children...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 15 Feb 2011 @ 2:34pm
  
  Re: Copyright...
  and do not forget the kittens needlessly suffering as they view these images.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The eejit (profile), 15 Feb 2011 @ 2:34pm
  
  Re: Copyright...
  What children? The ones being groped by TSA staff?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Feb 2011 @ 1:39pm

Disband the Govt. We're doomed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Everyone class action lawsuit, 19 Feb 2011 @ 3:53am

This needs to be eliminated before I fly. This is how the Nazis began in early Germany. Next thing u know you'll be getting groped before walking into the mall. Just watch this is a test to see if we will toe the line. We all have a vote and it's not for a puppet president rebub or dcrat. Our vote is fly if u will lay down. Do not fly if u stand up for you and your families degnity. Do u want your children and eldery parents to go through this in the future? Make a stand don't fly and let the airlines and goby officals know that this is illegal invasion of privacy. Start class action lawsuits natonwide.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]