Readers like you keep news free for everyone.

More than 5,000 readers have already pitched in to keep free access to The Journal.

For the price of one cup of coffee each week you can help keep paywalls away.

Support us today
Not now
Wednesday 6 December 2023 Dublin: 8°C
AP Photo/Julie Jacobson
Under Pressure

The US threatened Yahoo with a $250,000-a-day fine for not giving data to PRISM

The company challenged the US government on constitutional grounds, but failed and was forced to hand over the US user data.

US AUTHORITIES THREATENED to fine Yahoo $250,000 a day if it failed to comply with a secret surveillance programme requiring it to hand over user data in the name of national security, court documents showed Thursday.

The documents, made public in a rare unsealing by a secretive court panel, “underscore how we had to fight every step of the way to challenge the US government’s surveillance efforts,” Yahoo general counsel Ron Bell said in a blog post that will again raise privacy concerns.

The documents shed new light on the PRISM snooping programme revealed in leaked files from former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden.

The programme allowed US intelligence services to sweep up massive amounts of data from major Internet firms including Yahoo and Google. Officials have said the deeply contentious programme ended in 2011.

The 1,500 pages of documents were ordered to be released by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in the case dating from 2007, according to Bell, who said that in 2007, the US government “amended a key law to demand user information from online services.”

“We refused to comply with what we viewed as unconstitutional and overbroad surveillance and challenged the US government’s authority,” he said.

Yahoo’s court challenge failed and it was forced to hand over the US user data.

“At one point, the US government threatened the imposition of $250,000 in fines per day if we refused to comply,” Bell revealed.

Since the Snowden leaks, Yahoo and others have been seeking to make public these court documents to show they were forced to comply with government requests and made numerous attempts to fight these efforts, rather than simply acquiescing to them, as some critics say.

The opening of these court dockers to the public “is extremely rare,” Bell said, adding that the company was in the process of making the 1,500 pages publicly available online.

“We consider this an important win for transparency and hope that these records help promote informed discussion about the relationship between privacy, due process, and intelligence gathering,” Bell added.

But he said that “despite the declassification and release, portions of the documents remain sealed and classified to this day, unknown even to our team.”

‘Not reasonable’ 

The redacted court records, seen by AFP, showed Yahoo challenged the government on constitutional grounds, saying the surveillance programme violated protections against unreasonable search and seizure.

Yahoo said in one brief that the government’s requests were “unconstitutional because they permitted warrantless surveillance of US persons’ private communications without prior judicial review, and were not reasonable.”

The company argued that the programme was not merely monitoring overseas targets but some in the United States “with no knowledge that their Internet communications are being retrieved.”

Yahoo said the process was “similar to what is done in criminal cases” and would require monitoring from the company’s headquarters in Sunnyvale, California.

“The US Supreme Court has never sanctioned warrantless surveillance of US citizens,” Yahoo said in another brief.

A document dated 14 May , 2008 said Yahoo began complying with the government order two days earlier, on 12 May, on “priority user accounts for which the government wanted surveillance.”

- © AFP, 2014

Read: Column: Four trends that will have a significant impact on every business in Ireland >

Read: Irish government should ‘catch up’ with business on energy: Dimplex boss >

Your Voice
Readers Comments
    Submit a report
    Please help us understand how this comment violates our community guidelines.
    Thank you for the feedback
    Your feedback has been sent to our team for review.