4 ms·
I'm not sure you can claim that the movement of a physical object across a border is the same thing as a phone call. This becomes especially dangerous, once yo
by 0x5f3759df-i 12y ago
I'm not sure you can claim that the movement of a physical object across a border is the same thing as a phone call.
This becomes especially dangerous, once you start applying it to the internet, the average user has no way of knowing where a website they request is coming from and typing the same domain name will get a page from different locations depending on the circumstances.
Am I really crossing a border by requesting a website from Europe? Should I need a passport to do so?
- Terr_ 12y agoAlso, what happens if/when the NSA is forces your theoretically-only-domestic packets to take a small detour out of the country? Or equally likely, they have an agreement with a foreign power that they each spy on one-another's citizens and share findings.
- intopieces 12y ago>I'm not sure you can claim that the movement of a physical object across a border is the same thing as a phone call. It seems like this discussion is getting lost in the distinction between what we all believe is right/just, and what the law covers/claims/allows, which we know are distinct. Again, outside of the realm of our approval, it certainly is likely the government would claim that the movement of the a physical object across a border is the same thing as a phone call. The stretching of these kinds of laws to near-breaking is the court's Raison d'être. Remember, the right of business owners to deny service to black people was struck down using the interstate commerce clause[0] - something the founders certainly didn't have in mind whenever they wrote it. [0]Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States (1964) http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/379/241 http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/379/241