0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Just as a sender of a letter to a business colleague cannot be surprised that the recipient’s assistant opens the letter, people who use web-based email today cannot be surprised if their communications are processed by the recipient’s ECS provider in the course of delivery. Indeed, “a person has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information he voluntarily turns over to third parties.” Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735, 743-44 (1979). In particular, the Court noted that persons communicating through a service provided by an intermediary (in the Smith case, a telephone call routed through a telephone company) must necessarily expect that the communication will be subject to the intermediary’s systems. For example, the Court explained that in using the telephone, a person “voluntarily convey[ s ] numerical information to the telephone company and ‘expose[ s ]’ that information to its equipment in the ordinary course of business.” Id. at 744 (emphasis added).
“a person has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information he voluntarily turns over to third parties.”
No matter what happens, no matter what my last words may end up being, I want everyone to claim that they were: "If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine."
Aww, you guys rock. I feel the love... and the pitchforks and torches. Tingly!
From international relations to religious rivalries, from marriage to athlete's foot, whatever the problem a fundy's first solution is usually violence.
Guys, this is getting creepy. Can we talk about cannibalism instead?
A counter-point. Turns out things have been exaggerated
Non-Gmail users who send emails to Gmail recipients must expect that their emails will be subjected to Google's normal processes as the [email] provider for their intended recipients.
My problem is, I don't know what to believe anymore. Anyone can say anything, even about the NSA, and people will jump all hogwild over it. It's becoming hard to tell the truth from the sensationalist bullshit now.
I have never had any expectation that any digital communication is private. Just like with the Snowden leak, the only thing that surprises me is that people are surprised by this (whether it is true or not).Does that make me paranoid?
"Radiation, were beauty measured by the soul instead of the body, you would be legendary on the status of Helen of Troy. Be strong." -The Sandman
QuoteNon-Gmail users who send emails to Gmail recipients must expect that their emails will be subjected to Google's normal processes as the [email] provider for their intended recipients.Exscuse me if I no longer am believe that "Google's normal processes" mean that they won't scan my email. I don't care if it's done by a bot or a person, those contents are private and using them for market research is no better than giving them to an espionage organisation.
Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735, 743-44 (1979). In particular, the Court noted that persons communicating through a service provided by an intermediary (in the Smith case, a telephone call routed through a telephone company) must necessarily expect that the communication will be subject to the intermediary’s systems. For example, the Court explained that in using the telephone, a person “voluntarily convey[ s ] numerical information to the telephone company and ‘expose[ s ]’ that information to its equipment in the ordinary course of business.” Id. at 744 (emphasis added).