According to Reuters news service:
The fight centers around the world's first multilateral pact drafted to deal with global computer-related crime.
It is intended to cut through procedural and jurisdictional barriers that are taken advantage of by criminals using the Internet to prey upon their victims through crimes like fraud, copyright infringement and distribution of child pornography, as well as malicious codes that disable Web sites.
The Justice Department calls the initial provisions of the draft agreement of the 41-nation Council of Europe "consistent with the existing framework of U.S. law and procedure."
The United States has yet to decide whether to join the worldwide convention, but is expected to do so next year.
Opponents are already petitioning the United States not to go along with provisions they feel trample on individual privacy and erode government accountability.
One of their principal objections is data retention for Internet Service Providers, the electronic gateways to the Web.
Critics argue that these data logs can be used to track dissidents and persecute minorities.
A 27-group coalition including the American Civil Liberties Union, Privacy International and the Internet Society said:
"We urge you not to establish this requirement in a modern communications network.
"Police agencies and powerful private interests acting outside of the democratic means of accountability have sought to use a closed process to establish rules that will have the effect of binding legislation."
The Justice Department contends there is no retention requirement at issue but rather a "data-preservation" provision.
"Preservation is not a new idea," it said. "It has been the law in the United States for nearly five years."
The ACLU's associate director, Barry Steinhardt, said the pact could compel police in the United States to conduct searches under rules established by treaty "that don't respect the limits of police powers imposed by the U.S. Constitution."
But the Justice Department said there was no mandate that surveillance capabilities must be built into service providers' architecture.
The critics' response is that "there is no prohibition on states imposing such requirements if necessary under their legal systems."
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.