What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Play the flash game. view!
DragonAgeJourneys.com - Play the free companion flash game to Dragon Age: Origins.
12 Comments
- p9s50W5k4GUD2c6, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9"Some orders we see are daisy chains, where we get a subpoena for information on one person and then they want all the information on the persons calling or called by them," Sussman said. "We don't think these orders should include the pizza guy."
More examples of wanton abuse.
You know what the sad irony of this digial 'cry wolf' drama is? The cancerous over-reach of governmental agencies erodes the support of the People - thereby weakening their ability to monitor REAL threats when they appear.
There greed for power is a disgusting disservice to the Free World: both in matters of basic civil rights and national protection imperatives.
"Free World" - I remember when that phrase actually used to mean something.... - 5blocksfree, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4FTA: "What's all the fuss?" said Catholic University of America law professor Clifford Fishman. "The government has legitimate reasons to follow people. This is the technology law enforcement needs to use to get probable cause to search you, arrest you and throw you in jail."
Someone's missing the entire point of due process. You search (or track) when you *have* probable cause, not to *get* probable cause. I'd argue that any effort to track someone without *first* having probable cause, is a violation of the 4th Amendment. If you haven't broken the law, what you are doing is none of the government's business. - dementedcrabs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"The panel agreed that Congress should write rules governing what level of suspicion cops need to have before tracking people through their cell phones"
Congress only needs a 1 sentence law for this. "When ever we want bitch, we own your ass." - l0ne, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Where I live, far, far away from the US, a judge has to issue a warrant before a cell phone provider can legally handle any of your data to the police. Note the "can legally" -- you CANNOT give personal data here to anyone without a warrant or the person's consent, or you are liable to be sued for each breach of the privacy laws.
We don't need a law for cell phone tracking because we've already made laws for the general case.
I live in Italy, by the way, where legality is regarded by many as a nuisance. And yet we're so advanced on things like this. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You think a spouse is going to risk serious charges to do this when there are far easier, less risky ways to do it for fairly cheap?
- kremvax, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Wonton abuse usually only applies to the Chinese Food delivery guy. And only happens if you fail to consistantly tip him.
- fogbog293, on 02/10/2009, -0/+1@p9s50W5k4GUD2c6
"Free World" - I remember when that phrase actually used to mean something....
Yea, me too. I remember back in the 18th, 19th, and first half the the 20th century awesome freedom was, especially if you weren't a WASP. And remember how free we all were in 1969 getting drafted to fight in Vietnam? - demonicume, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1when they start tracking cell phones, i'll most probably switch to a disposable prepaid phone. it costs nearly the same as the bloated prices we pay now. sure, i wont get to use my treo, but the last thing i want is someone to pick me up because i said 'bush' and 'kill' in the same sentence.
it'd be nice if they used it for good... like finding dead middle schoolers and missing people. maybe i could call 911 from my cell and get a response where ever i may be.
but of course the govt can only think of ways to prosecute people. - theotheragentm, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I could see an overly jealous spouse lying to police and filing a missing person report just to check in on a mate.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Wanton abuse? Do you really think the person was being serious? That they were really tracking the pizza guy?
- Ikioi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2This is a complex issue for Congress to clarify. Is there a resonable expectation of privacy? For instance, if you are out in public driving a car, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy with your license plate. Ergo, little about public movements of a person are private. This means police (or car rental agencies) can put a gps tracking device under your bumper. But, this does not mean they can search your vehicle without probably cause. It is the act of transportation (where), not the cargo or the reason (what and why), that police do not need a warrent or probable cause.
Where this takes a right turn into unknown territory is that this involves the telephone, which is very explicit in what is necessary for the police to listen in on conversations. (Talking about local/state police, as it seems the federal goverment just ignores all law, and listens to everything.)
Police aren't asking to hear conversations, but they are asking for private data from cellphone companies. Data transmitted from a cellphone is awful close to being a conversation, even if it is a machine conversation between your phone and the cellphone towers.
And there's the new grey area. Is this just a question of where? Maybe so. Maybe not. Are we talking about telling where a suspect is driving, or who's apartment they are in? The first is public knowledge, the second is very private. Is it a question of conversation? Maybe so. Maybe not. Will they have access to more than where the suspect is, or will they be able to get more information, up to and including activating the microphone to "bug" the person?
And, that's not all. Do you have a reasonable expectation of privacy when using your cellphone? I believe so. So, if you have a reasonable expectation of privacy on a phone, then it may have to cover all instances of use. If the mere fact that I'm having a conversation is covered (IANAL), then by telling my location, they are at least telling police that my phone is on, which may indicate use. Also, the data may change in a different way if it is in use, and by using data analysis, they can time my calls, and extrapolate if I called anyone else they have a tap for, thus raising their level of suspicion on me. Or, they could just blanket track everyone, and still extrapolate who is calling who by conversation timing.
So, it's not just a simple question of where. It can get VERY tricky, because it's the where of a protected private conversation device, that extends not soley to public spaces, but very detailed into private spaces, where they may use it to see my movements within my own house. - boredzo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Devil's advocate: Pizza guys can be terrorists, too. "Hi, I'm here to deliver a bom-- I mean, two large pepperonis."
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is