4 ms·

interesting. i assume you're referring to legislation at a state level? got any links? i haven't read much about that era, but from what i have, it sounds like

interesting. i assume you're referring to legislation at a state level? got any links? i haven't read much about that era, but from what i have, it sounds like things were awesomely crazy back then w/ PIs tapping for clients, corporations tapping each other, etc. at least at the federal level, everything i'd read places the catalyst for modern wiretapping laws as the conviction appeal of seattle bootlegger Roy Olmstead's arrest based on evidence gathered by a warrantless wiretap by "rogue federal law enforcement officers." his appeal reached the supreme court in 1928 and was upheld 5-4 on 18th century trespass laws. in 1934, congress passed The Communications Act of 1934, which made wiretapping a federal criminal offense and any evidence obtained from such would be inadmissible. it wasn't until the The Omnibus Crime Control Act of 1968 that the constitutionality of wiretapping was articulated for investigative purposes. this gives a better overview/detail compared wikipedia: http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/litigation/materials/sac_2012/29-1_history_and_law_of_wiretapping.authcheckdam.pdf http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/li...

josh2600 13y ago
Oh Joy! I'll go see if I can dig up some links. Thanks for sharing this. I've seen this before, but I believe the legislation, at the state level, was driven by nosy neighbors. I'll ring up a friend of mine who's an expert on the subject to see if I can get some commentary.
josh2600 13y ago
Alright so digging a bit: At common law, “eavesdroppers, or such as listen under walls or windows, or the eaves of a house, to hearken after discourse, and thereupon to frame slanderous and mischievous tales, are a common nuisance and presentable at the court-leet; or are indictable at the sessions, and punishable by fine and finding of sureties for [their] good behavior.” [1] Very Early Eavesdropping law. but it wasn't prosecuted very often and faded from the common parlance: “Eavesdropping is indictable at the common law, not only in England but in our states. It is seldom brought to the attention of the courts, and our books contain too few decisions upon it to enable an author to define it with confidence.... It never occupied much space in the law, and it has nearly faded from the legal horizon.”[2] The first wiretapping laws were enacted by congress during world war 1: 40 Stat.1017-18 (1918)(“whoever during the period of governmental operation of the telephone and telegraph systems of the United States ... shall, without authority and without the knowledge and consent of the other users thereof, except as may be necessary for operation of the service, tap any telegraph or telephone line ... or whoever being employed in any such telephone or telegraph service shall divulge the contents of any such telephone or telegraph message to any person not duly authorized or entitled the receive the same, shall be fined not exceeding $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year or both”); 56 Cong.Rec. 10761-765 (1918). And you're right, that wiretaps weren't constitutional until 1968, but this doesn't discuss neighbors spying on neighbors. I think we found the same document: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/98-326.pdf http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/98-326.pdf I'll ping my buddy to see if he can shed a little more light, but this is related to wiretaps, which is slightly different from eavesdropping. [1] 4 BLACKSTONE,COMMENTARIES ON THE LAWS OF ENGLAND, 169 (1769). [2]1 BISHOP, COMMENTARIES ON THE CRIMINAL LAW, 670 (1882)."
josh2600 13y ago
Alright so I believe you're correct, again with respect to federal guidelines, and that the state guidelines are murky. I believe I may have to rescind my post at the top of this thread according to my friend, whose name I'll redact for his privacy: "It's funny -- one of the ideas I had batted around with my publisher for a second book was a history of wiretapping. :-) But, I never got around to doing any research and don't know the definitive answers to your questions off hand. In the thread you linked to below, mrexroad is correct about the Communications Act of 1934 (and section 605) being the first wiretapping federal law, at least that I'm aware of. And Olmstead is indeed a seminal case in the field, but whether it was the first, I don't know. The American Bar Association article he linked to seems pretty definitive. I had not ever heard the theory that wiretap/eavesdropping laws originated due to party lines. Not saying it isn't true, just that I've never heard that." So that's that. I'll have to blame some of the old engineers I talked to at AT&T for my miseducation, although they may have been referring to local (non-federal) laws. This has been fun :).

josh2600 13y ago

Oh Joy! I'll go see if I can dig up some links. Thanks for sharing this. I've seen this before, but I believe the legislation, at the state level, was driven by nosy neighbors. I'll ring up a friend of mine who's an expert on the subject to see if I can get some commentary.

josh2600 13y ago

Alright so digging a bit: At common law, “eavesdroppers, or such as listen under walls or windows, or the eaves of a house, to hearken after discourse, and thereupon to frame slanderous and mischievous tales, are a common nuisance and presentable at the court-leet; or are indictable at the sessions, and punishable by fine and finding of sureties for [their] good behavior.” [1] Very Early Eavesdropping law. but it wasn't prosecuted very often and faded from the common parlance: “Eavesdropping is indictable at the common law, not only in England but in our states. It is seldom brought to the attention of the courts, and our books contain too few decisions upon it to enable an author to define it with confidence.... It never occupied much space in the law, and it has nearly faded from the legal horizon.”[2] The first wiretapping laws were enacted by congress during world war 1: 40 Stat.1017-18 (1918)(“whoever during the period of governmental operation of the telephone and telegraph systems of the United States ... shall, without authority and without the knowledge and consent of the other users thereof, except as may be necessary for operation of the service, tap any telegraph or telephone line ... or whoever being employed in any such telephone or telegraph service shall divulge the contents of any such telephone or telegraph message to any person not duly authorized or entitled the receive the same, shall be fined not exceeding $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year or both”); 56 Cong.Rec. 10761-765 (1918). And you're right, that wiretaps weren't constitutional until 1968, but this doesn't discuss neighbors spying on neighbors. I think we found the same document: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/98-326.pdf http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/98-326.pdf I'll ping my buddy to see if he can shed a little more light, but this is related to wiretaps, which is slightly different from eavesdropping. [1] 4 BLACKSTONE,COMMENTARIES ON THE LAWS OF ENGLAND, 169 (1769). [2]1 BISHOP, COMMENTARIES ON THE CRIMINAL LAW, 670 (1882)."

josh2600 13y ago

Alright so I believe you're correct, again with respect to federal guidelines, and that the state guidelines are murky. I believe I may have to rescind my post at the top of this thread according to my friend, whose name I'll redact for his privacy: "It's funny -- one of the ideas I had batted around with my publisher for a second book was a history of wiretapping. :-) But, I never got around to doing any research and don't know the definitive answers to your questions off hand. In the thread you linked to below, mrexroad is correct about the Communications Act of 1934 (and section 605) being the first wiretapping federal law, at least that I'm aware of. And Olmstead is indeed a seminal case in the field, but whether it was the first, I don't know. The American Bar Association article he linked to seems pretty definitive. I had not ever heard the theory that wiretap/eavesdropping laws originated due to party lines. Not saying it isn't true, just that I've never heard that." So that's that. I'll have to blame some of the old engineers I talked to at AT&T for my miseducation, although they may have been referring to local (non-federal) laws. This has been fun :).