4 ms·
Most companies don't collect nationality information, so there is no question in my mind that the program (if it collects more than metadata) has spied on Ameri
by furyg3 13y ago
Most companies don't collect nationality information, so there is no question in my mind that the program (if it collects more than metadata) has spied on Americans, in violation of the law.
If I sign up to Yahoo France, while in France, and give my French address, I assume the NSA (or Dutch AVID, in this case) would assume I'm French and could spy on me. But this may be incorrect, I could be an American... Yahoo never asked me nor verified my identity, let alone my nationality...
Even if they did, some people are dual nationals, and some people are nationals of the US and the US doesn't know about it (Children of Americans born and raised abroad, who have a foreign nationality as well, have no US birth certificate, never lived in the US, have no SSN, and have not yet asked for a passport). These unregistered people are Americans, too, the law says they cannot be spied on without a warrant...
The NSA would have to be able to prove that accounts do not belong to Americans (impossible, for many reasons).
- akiselev 13y agoThis is an interesting point but I doubt any court would prevent the NSA from spying on foreign communications based on this argument. Immigration and nationality are exclusively "guilty until proven innocent." The burden on proof is on YOU to prove that you are a US citizen, whether you're stopped by some police department or the border patrol. This is why you're supposed to always have your Green Card on your person.
- furyg3 13y agoThis is completely incorrect. In most states it is not required to have ID on you. Most US citizens do not carry proof of citizenship (passport or birth certificate), and a Drivers License is not proof of citizenship. US citizens travel abroad, and it would be illegal for the government to intercept communications between a US citizen and someone else, regardless of location of either party, regardless of the location of the communications intercept. Furthermore, based on your logic, the government could intercept all emails where someone's passport was not scanned and attached...