Court case: E-mail isn't private

The hub of Aura activity, the cortex that binds the forum together.
Post Reply
User avatar
Evil Matt
Enforcer
Posts: 320
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 5:19 am
Location: Sunny Seattle
Contact:

Post by Evil Matt » Wed Jul 07, 2004 6:20 am

Found this linked from the Laporte Report. It shows how far we have yet to go.

http://www.idg.com.sg/idgwww.nsf/0/5CD8369...6F?OpenDocument
Court case: E-mail isn't private
By Grant Gross
IDG News Service, Washington Bureau
05-07-2004

A U.S. appeals court has ruled that the vice president of an ISP (Internet service provider) can't be charged with violating federal wiretapping laws for snooping on e-mail sent to his customers, a decision that will give ISPs and other e-mail providers free rein to spy on e-mail, privacy advocates said.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit's decision Tuesday affirms a district court ruling dismissing a criminal wiretap charge against Bradford C. Councilman, who was vice president of Interloc Inc., a rare book listing service, in 1998. Interloc, since acquired by another company, provided an e-mail service to book dealers who were its customers, and in January 1998, Councilman told employees to write computer code to read incoming e-mail messages from rival book dealer Amazon.com Inc.

Councilman was charged with violating the U.S. Wiretap Act, which prohibits private citizens from intercepting communications, but appeals court Judge Juan R. Torruella wrote that U.S. law doesn't prohibit ISPs and other e-mail providers from reading e-mail residing on their servers. The Wiretap Act gives wire and oral communication more protection against interception of stored communications than it does for electronic communication, Torruella added.

"We believe that the language of the (wiretap) statute makes clear that Congress meant to give lesser protection to electronic communications than wire and oral communications," Torruella wrote. "Moreover, at this juncture, much of the protection may have been eviscerated by the realities of modern technology. We observe, as most courts have, that the language may be out of step with the technological realities of computer crimes. However, it is not the province of this court to graft meaning onto the statute where Congress has spoken plainly."

Privacy advocates including the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) questioned the appeals court ruling. By ruling that an e-mail was in storage instead of transit when it stopped for a "millisecond" on Interloc's servers, the appeals court has opened up e-mail to easier spying by law enforcement or ISPs, said Lara Flint, staff counsel for the CDT.

"We think it's a very strained interpretation of the law," Flint said of the appeals court ruling. "I think people understand that their employer has the right to read their work e-mail, but I don't think people have the concept that their personal e-mail is susceptible to being read and used by their ISPs ... without their consent."

The decision "dealt a grave blow to the privacy of Internet communications," the EFF said in a statement.

"By interpreting the Wiretap Act's privacy protections very narrowly, this court has effectively given Internet communications providers free rein to invade the privacy of their users for any reason and at any time," Kevin Bankston, an EFF attorney and Equal Justice Works fellow, said in a statement. "This decision makes clear that the law has failed to adapt to the realities of Internet communications and must be updated to protect online privacy."

But Councilman's lawyer said the decision was the right one given that Congress provides less protection to stored electronic communication than it does to other forms of communication. Congress may want to change the law, but Councilman didn't break existing law, said Andrew Good, of the law firm Good and Cormier in Boston.

"It's the right decision on what the law is," Good said. "It isn't a decision about what the law should be."

Under current law, e-mail users shouldn't expect privacy, and current law doesn't distinguish between an e-mail service provided by an employer or an ISP, Good added. "Everybody knows, I think, that when you use an e-mail service provider from an employer, a school or an ISP, that they have access to your e-mail and don't need your permission," Good said.
WildCard
Not-A-Deserter
Posts: 885
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 8:31 am

Post by WildCard » Wed Jul 07, 2004 7:27 am

.....they must enjoy seeing the porn people get sent in email.
Last edited by WildCard on Wed Jul 07, 2004 7:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Mik
Born under a bad sign
Posts: 3394
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 8:44 am
Location: Beyond your borders
Contact:

Post by Mik » Wed Jul 07, 2004 10:29 am

E-mail has never been private and is no more so than phone call. Even 'Private' messages on these boards, do you know how easy it is to get a hold of thoose. Nothing is private.
User avatar
Chewi
Anti-Hero
Posts: 3521
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 3:51 pm
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Post by Chewi » Wed Jul 07, 2004 12:19 pm

I'm not particularly bothered. If you want real privacy, you should use encryption. That's not too difficult these days. I've got nothing to hide so I don't bother with it myself.
User avatar
Vandire
Vagabond
Posts: 1994
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 4:01 am
Location: Scotland, Mars
Contact:

Post by Vandire » Wed Jul 07, 2004 9:29 pm

privacy in our society is a joke, you can hardly go anywhere without being on camera. E-mails definately aint private, nothing is. You get folk who think that its safe to use there credit card details on the net, and it kinda is with encryption, but these people get lazy, and let IE save the details in the autocomplete, i got around 20 folks credit card details, im just smart enough not to use them, tho i iguess i could sell them to an eejit for like £100 each, and id not get in shit for it, but yeah, privacy is a joke, live with it
User avatar
runawaygurl
Not-A-Deserter
Posts: 858
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 5:16 am
Location: Carlisle

Post by runawaygurl » Fri Jul 09, 2004 12:55 pm

anyone who actually thought e-mail was private is dumb. Because I took a class on the internet and how it works and we went in depth in how many different portals and other things the actual message has to go thro. And usually if you encrypt it, it can still be broken easily. So whats the point?
User avatar
Vandire
Vagabond
Posts: 1994
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 4:01 am
Location: Scotland, Mars
Contact:

Post by Vandire » Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:26 pm

if you want a message to be private, go upto the persona and whisper it in tehre ear, buut then, like with anything, its a matter of trust, you gota trust the person not to tell anyone else, so there is no such thing as true privacy anymore
Post Reply