3 ms·

Your argument is pivoting on the definition of ownership of data, that the fourth amendment doesn't apply to metadata because it's not 'your' data. Even if we

Your argument is pivoting on the definition of ownership of data, that the fourth amendment doesn't apply to metadata because it's not 'your' data. Even if we accept that premise, the fourth amendment still protects against "unreasonable searches and seizures". This means that the government needs to go through a meaningful review process to take possession of other people's property. This is unquestionable not the case with PRISM / FISA court approvals. Blank checks for the government to access whatever data it wants is unreasonable searches and seizures The fact of the matter is that metadata is somebody's property and by forcing all third-parties to be unable to defend their data about their customers, the government denies enterprises the ability to compete in the marketplace on as many privacy features.

rayiner 8y ago
Textually, the two parts are linked—the 4A protects against unreasonable searches and seizures of your property. The data is of course the phone company’s or the web host’s property, and those entities can raise the 4A to oppose a search. However, my understanding is that the metadata collection was done with the cooperation of the data owners.
caseysoftware 8y ago
I'm reading a great book - Habeas Data - on specifically these issues. The idea of the metadata being separate from the actual data (in terms of surveillance and warrants) became a thing in the late 70s.. a case involving ATT in 1977 iirc. Since that time, it's been generally understood that to get the actual data requires a warrant whereas the metadata just requires asking whoever is storing the metadata. If we want to roll that back - and I do - we need to demonstrate that the metadata is just as telling/informative/sensitive/damaging as the data itself and therefore should be protected under the same standards.

rayiner 8y ago

Textually, the two parts are linked—the 4A protects against unreasonable searches and seizures of your property. The data is of course the phone company’s or the web host’s property, and those entities can raise the 4A to oppose a search. However, my understanding is that the metadata collection was done with the cooperation of the data owners.

caseysoftware 8y ago

I'm reading a great book - Habeas Data - on specifically these issues. The idea of the metadata being separate from the actual data (in terms of surveillance and warrants) became a thing in the late 70s.. a case involving ATT in 1977 iirc. Since that time, it's been generally understood that to get the actual data requires a warrant whereas the metadata just requires asking whoever is storing the metadata. If we want to roll that back - and I do - we need to demonstrate that the metadata is just as telling/informative/sensitive/damaging as the data itself and therefore should be protected under the same standards.