3 ms·

Nice analysis. I tend to think the evolution of expectation of privacy from regular mail to email is similar to the evolution of expectation of privacy from la

Nice analysis. I tend to think the evolution of expectation of privacy from regular mail to email is similar to the evolution of expectation of privacy from land-line phones to cell phones. That is under the 4th Amendment land-line phone users have a reasonable expectation of privacy; therefore, Gov. must obtain a search warrant to use evidence gathered from such sources against the criminal defendant. Yet, Courts define cell phones as little more than radios, and one does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy of radio transmissions, so evidence gathered can be used against a criminal defendant without being obtained by warrant. So, right or wrong, I think the whole frame is similar to mail and email, of course emails are not defined as radio transmissions. Now all that said, between the Bush and Obama administrations reasonable expectation of privacy has been eroded (and as a result the 4th Amendment), and de facto there is no expectation of privacy over anything except maybe what is in your head.

badgar 14y ago
IANAL, but cell phone calls are encrypted, and I'm pretty damn sure you need a warrant to legally decrypt a cell phone conversation over the air. But I bet you wouldn't need a warrant if you wanted to just capture and show the existence of the emitted radio waves as evidence, ignoring their contents (if you were making some kind of a traffic analysis type of argument).
Cadsby 14y ago
> That is under the 4th Amendment land-line phone users have a reasonable expectation of privacy This wasn't always the case. In fact the government argued the exact opposite for years.
- will_brown 14y ago
  The Government (prosecutors at State and Federal levels) but to the best of my knowledge the Courts have always upheld defendants reasonable expectation of privacy as to landlines in the home. I suppose pay phones are landlines, but reasonable expectation of privacy is more complicated - originally courts upheld reasonable expectation of privacy when there was a phone booth, but not when the pay phone was in the open - this varies from state to state but I would not be surprised if this expectation of privacy has whittled away in the majority of states.

badgar 14y ago

IANAL, but cell phone calls are encrypted, and I'm pretty damn sure you need a warrant to legally decrypt a cell phone conversation over the air. But I bet you wouldn't need a warrant if you wanted to just capture and show the existence of the emitted radio waves as evidence, ignoring their contents (if you were making some kind of a traffic analysis type of argument).

Cadsby 14y ago

> That is under the 4th Amendment land-line phone users have a reasonable expectation of privacy This wasn't always the case. In fact the government argued the exact opposite for years.

will_brown 14y ago
The Government (prosecutors at State and Federal levels) but to the best of my knowledge the Courts have always upheld defendants reasonable expectation of privacy as to landlines in the home. I suppose pay phones are landlines, but reasonable expectation of privacy is more complicated - originally courts upheld reasonable expectation of privacy when there was a phone booth, but not when the pay phone was in the open - this varies from state to state but I would not be surprised if this expectation of privacy has whittled away in the majority of states.