- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Human rights groups, WhatsApp drag Israeli spyware vendor to court
Human rights groups, WhatsApp drag Israeli spyware vendor to court Attorney Kyle McLorg representing NGOs says the surveillance technology should not be used to justify government's intrusion since it threatens free expression and privacy A group of NGOs and human rights groups have joined the WhatsApp's lawsuit against Israeli spyware vendor NSO Group. The NSO Group has been accused of...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
Human rights groups, WhatsApp drag Israeli spyware vendor to court
Attorney Kyle McLorg representing NGOs says the surveillance technology should not be used to justify government's intrusion since it threatens free expression and privacy
A group of NGOs and human rights groups have joined the WhatsApp's lawsuit against Israeli spyware vendor NSO Group. The NSO Group has been accused of selling Pegasus surveillance software to government agencies to target human right activists under the pretext of terrorism laws.
Attorney Kyle McLorg, who is representing the NGOs, has said in his brief that the surveillance technology threatens rights of free expression and privacy, recognized as foundational by the international law.
WhatsApp along with its parent company Facebook had sued NSO group last year in the Northern California District Court for hacking the WhatsApp server and plant the surveillance software on 1,400 devices of users across the world in violation of the US Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and California Comprehensive Data Access and Fraud Act. The WhatsApp had revealed that the Pegasus spyware was installed in the devices belonging to journalists, lawyers, religious leaders and political dissidents in various parts of the globe.
"Justifications should be limited to situations in which the interest of the whole nation is at stake, rather than the interests of the government, a regime or a power group alone," Attorney Kyle McLorg noted in his brief, arguing that states should not adopt counterterrorism measures to justify government intrusions. The human rights groups have filed an amicus brief before the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The rights groups include Amnesty International, Committee to Protect Journalists, Internet Freedom Foundation, Paradigm Initiative, Privacy International, Red en Defensa de los Derechas Digitales and Reporters Without Borders.
The accused, NSO Group, has so far not responded to these allegations. However, in the past, the Israeli software vendor had argued that it is not liable to respond since it is protected under the sovereign immunity doctrine that shields foreign governments from lawsuits when national security issues get impacted. It had further stated that it supplies government and spy agencies with digital break-in tools which are necessary for public safety.
The claim, however, met with disapproval from Courtney Radsch, Advocacy Director at the Committee to Protect Journalists. According to Radsch, the repeated and extensive use of Pegasus spyware to target journalists and their networks is in contradiction to the NSO Group's claim that the Pegasus is only used to combat terrorism and criminal activities.