Responding to the following from Norm Hardy:

I hear concern over privacy and also over erasure of White House tapes. I pose the following question: Should an institution have the right to private communication? Is the White House an institution? Notice that I say "should" not "does". Which sort of world would you rather live in. I have mixed feelings. If we say that all computer communications should be accessible to courts then the effect will be to displace some communications from computers.

Institutions -- individuals, groups of individuals, companies -- should have the right to private communication. (In terms of e-mail, this means that one knows where all copies of their letters are and has the power to erase them?) The right of government employees to private communication is limited by one important factor: many of these individuals are empowered to use force against citizens, and they responsibile for justifying the use of this force. (Examples of what I mean by force: arresting and putting people in jail, searching, seizing, impounding, levying taxes, wiretapping, shooting alleged criminals). Anyone given this kind of power has a heavy burden of proof and had better be able to prove beyond a shadow of doubt that their actions are justified. The burden should not be on individuals to constantly be open to scrutiny to demonstrate their innocence, but on those with the power to suspend individual rights. =================================================================== Eric Fogleman eric.fogleman@analog.com Analog Devices Semiconductor Voice: (617) 937-2275 804 Woburn Street Fax: (617) 937-2024 Wilmington, MA 01887-3462 ===================================================================