| |
EdwardBontkowskiFirstPaper 7 - 28 Jul 2010 - Main.EbenMoglen
|
|
META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper%25" |
| | It is clearly evident that in today’s society stored email plays as vital a role (and probably a more vital one) as the telephone did in 1967, and accordingly society’s expectations regarding the privacy of email are the same as they were for privacy of the telephone in 1967. Therefore, I believe it is time for courts to recognize that people have a reasonable expectation of privacy with respect to stored email. | |
> > | This is a good capsule
summary of the situation, with a peculiar set of conclusions. If, as
you assert without anything better than the analogy with the
telephone to support you, the Fourth Amendment itself should be the
only legal standard for judging email searches, why isn't the rule
the same one that attaches to other "important," "vital," or
"critical" documents and information in the hands of unaffiliated
third parties, namely that no warrant is necessary and the government
can do what it needs or wants to do using subpoenas?
The statute was designed to provide more than the Fourth Amendment
would provide, and it does so. People have responded to the
blandishments of the world's largest intelligence service, however,
and have decided to store all their personal communications forever
on computers belonging to unaffiliated third parties who offer them
"free" email services in return for being allowed to spy on their
communications, and—oh so coincidentally—also rendering
those communications easily subject to subpoena by government, which
then begins eroding as much of the statute's remaining protections as
they can.
A better solution is for everyone to have an extremely cheap, simple
appliance that stores all their email in their homes and makes it
accessible to them via their mobile devices everywhere. That email
would then be reachable only by search warrant, both before delivery
by any ECS storing and forwarding the mail for delivery, under ECPA,
and at the residence, under the Fourth Amendment. The statute would
do what it was intended to do, and everyone would be fine.
Of course, even without such an appliance, running a personal mail
server is trivial for those with knowledge and even scant resources.
And for everyone, without exception, Google Mail represents a loss of
liberty that's far more expensive than the cost being saved by "free"
service. But blaming ECPA for the peoples' bamboozlement and failure
to protect their rights seems to me an odd outcome. I may well be
wrong, but the arguments you would need to make in order to explain
why aren't touched on here.
| |
|
|
Revision 7 | r7 - 28 Jul 2010 - 14:40:07 - EbenMoglen |
Revision 6 | r6 - 06 May 2010 - 05:03:55 - BrianS |
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors. All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| |