Strange but true from the legendary past.....

Thinking about the Rudd-Conroy foray into Internet censorship brought to mind this American court case, John Doe et al v Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General of the United States of America et al from 2005.

Litigation from a time when the US Government, as part of the War On Terror, even wanted to find out what library books its citizens were reading.
Using the mechanism of National Security Letters (NSLs) which request information from a third party and are issued by the FBI or by other government agencies with authority to conduct national security investigations.

Eventually the US Government dropped its pursuit of the Executive Director of the Library Connection, an online service.
He does not appear to have ever given the FBI the information it requested.

However NSLs which attempt to force silence on recipients still exist according to the American Civil Liberties Union:

Through NSLs the FBI can compile vast dossiers about innocent people and obtain sensitive information such as the web sites a person visits, a list of e-mail addresses with which a person has corresponded, or even unmask the identity of a person who has posted anonymous speech on a political website. The provision also allows the FBI to forbid or "gag" anyone who receives an NSL from telling anyone about the record demand.

Although the burden of proof as to why a citizen should be gagged is now on government agencies.

This little piece of government spying history is again relevant, as at the end of March 2009 two House of Representatives Democrats have re-introduced the Nadler/Flake bill now known as the National Security Letters Reform Act 2009 to curb excessive snooping using these NSFs.

Barack Obama is said to have supported the bill when it was first introduced in 2007.
Will he now as president support this reform or fight it?