[Fwd: [p2p-research] Slashdot | Federal Judge Says E-mail Not Protected By 4th Amendment]
-------- Forwarded Message -------- From: Paul D. Fernhout <pdfernhout@kurtz-fernhout.com> To: Peer-To-Peer Research List <p2presearch@listcultures.org> Subject: [p2p-research] Slashdot | Federal Judge Says E-mail Not Protected By 4th Amendment Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:53:53 -0400 http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/10/29/2257209/Federal-Judge-Says-E-mail-Not... Protected-By-4th-Amendment """ In the case In re United States, Judge Mosman ruled that there is no constitutional requirement of notice to the account holder because the Fourth Amendment does not apply to e-mails under the third-party doctrine. 'When a person uses the Internet, the user's actions are no longer in his or her physical home; in fact he or she is not truly acting in private space at all. The user is generally accessing the Internet with a network account and computer storage owned by an ISP like Comcast or NetZero. All materials stored online, whether they are e-mails or remotely stored documents, are physically stored on servers owned by an ISP. When we send an e-mail or instant message from the comfort of our own homes to a friend across town the message travels from our computer to computers owned by a third party, the ISP, before being delivered to the intended recipient. Thus, b privateb information is actually being held by third-party private companies." """ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_W._Mosman From: http://volokh.com/2009/10/28/district-judge-concludes-e-mail-not-protected-b... -fourth-amendment/ "The case is In re United States, b F.Supp.2d b-, 2009 WL 3416240 (D.Or. 2009), by District Judge Mosman. The issue in the case is whether the government must notify a person when the government obtains a search warrant to access the contents of the personbs e-mail account. Judge Mosman concludes that Rule 41 and 18 U.S.C. 2703(a) require the notice to be served on the ISP, not the account holder, as a statutory matter. He then rules that there is no constitutional requirement of notice to the account holder because the Fourth Amendment does not apply to the e-mails under the third-party doctrine. Herebs the relevant analysis: ..." I don't really know what this means for peer-to-peer in general, given email is a peer-to-peer technology. --Paul Fernhout http://www.pdfernhout.net/ http://www.beyondajoblessrecovery.org/ _______________________________________________ p2presearch mailing list p2presearch@listcultures.org http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]
I wonder what would happen to people like myself, who are both the ISP and the "account holder"? It would appear this is fertile grounds for throwing a rock in the gears. On Thu, 29 Oct 2009, Ted Smith wrote:
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 23:13:47 -0400 From: Ted Smith <teddks@gmail.com> To: Cypherpunks list <cypherpunks@al-qaeda.net> Subject: [Fwd: [p2p-research] Slashdot | Federal Judge Says E-mail Not Protected By 4th Amendment]
-------- Forwarded Message -------- From: Paul D. Fernhout <pdfernhout@kurtz-fernhout.com> To: Peer-To-Peer Research List <p2presearch@listcultures.org> Subject: [p2p-research] Slashdot | Federal Judge Says E-mail Not Protected By 4th Amendment Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:53:53 -0400
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/10/29/2257209/Federal-Judge-Says-E-mail-Not... Protected-By-4th-Amendment """ In the case In re United States, Judge Mosman ruled that there is no constitutional requirement of notice to the account holder because the Fourth Amendment does not apply to e-mails under the third-party doctrine. 'When a person uses the Internet, the user's actions are no longer in his or her physical home; in fact he or she is not truly acting in private space at all. The user is generally accessing the Internet with a network account and computer storage owned by an ISP like Comcast or NetZero. All materials stored online, whether they are e-mails or remotely stored documents, are physically stored on servers owned by an ISP. When we send an e-mail or instant message from the comfort of our own homes to a friend across town the message travels from our computer to computers owned by a third party, the ISP, before being delivered to the intended recipient. Thus, b privateb information is actually being held by third-party private companies." """ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_W._Mosman
From: http://volokh.com/2009/10/28/district-judge-concludes-e-mail-not-protected-b... -fourth-amendment/ "The case is In re United States, b F.Supp.2d b-, 2009 WL 3416240 (D.Or. 2009), by District Judge Mosman. The issue in the case is whether the government must notify a person when the government obtains a search warrant to access the contents of the personbs e-mail account. Judge Mosman concludes that Rule 41 and 18 U.S.C. 2703(a) require the notice to be served on the ISP, not the account holder, as a statutory matter. He then rules that there is no constitutional requirement of notice to the account holder because the Fourth Amendment does not apply to the e-mails under the third-party doctrine. Herebs the relevant analysis: ..."
I don't really know what this means for peer-to-peer in general, given email is a peer-to-peer technology.
--Paul Fernhout http://www.pdfernhout.net/ http://www.beyondajoblessrecovery.org/
_______________________________________________ p2presearch mailing list p2presearch@listcultures.org http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
[demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]
-- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin_at_mfn.org 0xF6D40CF5 0xpgp_key_mgmt_is_broken-dont_bother "Never belong to any party, always oppose privileged classes and public plunderers, never lack sympathy with the poor, always remain devoted to the public welfare, never be satisfied with merely printing news, always be drastically independent, never be afraid to attack wrong, whether by predatory plutocracy or predatory poverty." Joseph Pulitzer 1907 Speech
On Thu, 2009-10-29 at 22:43 -0500, J.A. Terranson wrote:
I wonder what would happen to people like myself, who are both the ISP and the "account holder"? It would appear this is fertile grounds for throwing a rock in the gears.
You get shot. [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]
On 10/30/09 03:51, Ted Smith wrote:
On Thu, 2009-10-29 at 22:43 -0500, J.A. Terranson wrote:
I wonder what would happen to people like myself, who are both the ISP and the "account holder"? It would appear this is fertile grounds for throwing a rock in the gears.
Hehe. Some things for the Cypherpunks here. Know pearls of the Law of The Land, stay away from the pigs. Whenever you hear that "judge so and so passed a judgement"... you know that you are not hearing from a Common Law Court of Record. Which means, its just thuggish Roman Law, with a government employee "the judge", creating statutes on the fly, just like everything else from the DC criminal gangsters, as they go about the business of pillaging "for profit". What a disgrace to that noble word, "profit".
You get shot.
Exactly. Gangsters shoot their dogs.If you remain their registered dog, you will be shot. You have to know THE LAW - not the corrupt language** that flows from DC. Knowing THE LAW involves knowing how to hold court, etc. See: http://1215.org/ http://1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/jurisdiction.htm http://1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/pvc.htm ** http://1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/language.htm Freedom is not free. If you "believe in the courts" and "judgements of judges", you believe in fairies. The courts are *yours*... if you only knew. http://1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/lectures/sovereignty/index.html On gsc, I posted:
email is a peer-to-peer technology.
No, e-mail has degenerated into central servers (GMail + Yahoo + Hotmail) that have all the information, all duly indexed and ready for searches and advertisements. If you want privacy, you will have to pay for it. You can have privacy that locks out the email provider - OpenPGP. You can POP the email onto your own computer via SSL. http://www.rayservers.com/e-mail Who said the 4th Amendment was free? You paid for your property and thus naturally under the Common Law, The Law of The Land, you had that right to be private and defend your property without the proclamation on holy scroll paper "the Constitution" written and signed by some dead people. Of course, today you can only rent your property from your town, and "citizens" think "rights" are granted by government... and idiot judges who think they have the power to pass judgement over the people, but that is another discussion. How many will rush up and buy? Mmmmpppff. Cheers, ---Venkat.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 "J.A. Terranson" <measl@mfn.org> writes:
I wonder what would happen to people like myself, who are both the ISP and the "account holder"? It would appear this is fertile grounds for throwing a rock in the gears.
Or people who just take incoming mail straight to their site by SMTP. It's not even necessary to "be an ISP". Or who encrypt the mail. Where should the rock be thrown? -- StealthMonger <StealthMonger@nym.mixmin.net> -- stealthmail: Scripts to hide whether you're doing email, or when, or with whom. mailto:stealthsuite@nym.mixmin.net Finger for key. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8+ <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/> iD8DBQFK6maDDkU5rhlDCl4RAkg+AJ9XTk+1uFWB21lhuk7+bW+AaZG9XACeIAeX YwnVr3YAZFbALOatZkDEeDA= =Z7Ul -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
StealthMonger wrote:
"J.A. Terranson" <measl@mfn.org> writes:
I wonder what would happen to people like myself, who are both the ISP and the "account holder"? It would appear this is fertile grounds for throwing a rock in the gears.
Or people who just take incoming mail straight to their site by SMTP. It's not even necessary to "be an ISP".
Or who encrypt the mail.
Where should the rock be thrown?
Into a safety deposit box which the judge is then beaten with. They still need a subpoena to open one of those, don't they?
On Fri, 30 Oct 2009, Europus wrote:
StealthMonger wrote:
"J.A. Terranson" <measl@mfn.org> writes:
I wonder what would happen to people like myself, who are both the ISP and the "account holder"? It would appear this is fertile grounds for throwing a rock in the gears.
Or people who just take incoming mail straight to their site by SMTP. It's not even necessary to "be an ISP".
Or who encrypt the mail.
Where should the rock be thrown?
Into a safety deposit box which the judge is then beaten with. They still need a subpoena to open one of those, don't they?
Not in the UK they dont. -- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin_at_mfn.org 0xF6D40CF5 0xpgp_key_mgmt_is_broken-dont_bother "Never belong to any party, always oppose privileged classes and public plunderers, never lack sympathy with the poor, always remain devoted to the public welfare, never be satisfied with merely printing news, always be drastically independent, never be afraid to attack wrong, whether by predatory plutocracy or predatory poverty." Joseph Pulitzer 1907 Speech
participants (5)
-
Europus -
J.A. Terranson -
Rayservers -
StealthMonger -
Ted Smith