5 ms·
>When through the normal course of using a technology you reveal information to the government (in this case the military) they can use that information against
by will_brown 7y ago
>When through the normal course of using a technology you reveal information to the government (in this case the military) they can use that information against you.
That’s not the legal standard for searches and seizures under the 4th amendment.
It’s about the reasonable expectation of privacy, and when a defense attorney emails their client the client has a reasonable expectation of privacy. A reasonable person doesn’t think the prosecutor has embedded tracking into emails sent to their attorney which will relay information back to the prosecutor when shared forwarded to the client by the defense attorney.
- soulofmischief 7y agoI have what I consider to be a reasonable expectation of privacy not to have 3rd party tracking pixels embedded in websites I visit via a secure connection on the internet.
- will_brown 7y agoWell I’m not so sure that is a reasonable expectation (certainly visiting a website isn’t the same as an attorney client communication), but either way the 4th amendment only applies to searches and seizures by the government not 3rd party websites.
- inetknght 7y agoI fully believe it to be a reasonable expectation which is unfortunately violated daily and routinely often under the nefarious guise of marketing.
- will_brown 7y agoWell as I previously mentioned the 4th amendment only protects from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government...reasonable belief or not the 4th amendment isn’t going to protect you from data collected by non-government actors (unless the government directed them to collect it for them).
- inetknght 7y agoIt's unfortunate that the U.S. has such lack privacy protections compared to Europe.
- soulofmischief 7y agoAnd it starts with expectations, which our government belittles us for having.
- MaupitiBlue 7y ago>>When through the normal course of using a technology you reveal information to the government (in this case the military) they can use that information against you. >That’s not the legal standard for searches and seizures under the 4th amendment. Was Katz overruled?
- will_brown 7y agoNo the holding/Law is still: Regardless of the location, a conversation is protected from unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment if it is made with a "reasonable expectation of privacy". The law is not and never was: >When through the normal course of using a technology you reveal information to the government (in this case the military) they can use that information against you.