Slashdot Mirror

There is no reasonable expectation of privacy when you broadcast information from your home in an unsecured form.

It is a grey area, because the ECPA makes any "intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept, any wire, oral, or electronic communication" illegal, however a recent court case found:

In United States v. Ahrndt, No. 3:08-cr-00468-KI (D. Or. Jan. 28, 2010), Ahrndt argued that his neighbor violated the ECPA when she connected to his unsecured wireless network and accessed his iTunes library while a police officer observed. The court noted that under the ECPA, it is not unlawful for any person "to intercept or access an electronic communication made through an electronic communication system that is configured so that such electronic communication is readily accessible to the general public." Because Ahrndt's wireless network was broadcast in a 400 foot radius around his house, and because his iTunes program was configured to automatically share files with any computer that joined that network, the court held that the wireless network was "readily accessible to the general public," and rejected Ahrndt's ECPA claim. For similar reasons, the court also denied the defendant's Fourth Amendment claim, finding that he had no reasonable expectation of privacy in his wirelessly broadcast iTunes files.

Clearly, though, you can obtain consent from the original addressee and then disclose.

wherein, "intercept" means the aural or other acquisition of the contents of any wire, electronic, or oral communication through the use of any electronic, mechanical, or other device;

The ECPA also provides that "In a civil action under this section, appropriate relief includes--(1) such preliminary and other equitable or declaratory relief as may be appropriate;(2) damages under subsection (c); and (3) a reasonable attorney's fee and other litigation costs reasonably incurred.

Damages.--The court may assess as damages in a civil action under this section the sum of the actual damages suffered by the plaintiff and any profits made by the violator as a result of the violation, but in no case shall a person entitled to recover receive less than the sum of $1,000.

Seems like a good case can be that emails to mistyped addresses are being intercepted by Verisign. Certainly, the emails where not intended to be sent to Verisign, and they appear to be collecting some information from the email (the from address).

Ever since the original call-to-arms there's been a number of different organizations listed as worthy of donations. There is an organization that has done more than the FSF, EFF, [your acronym here] combined. That is the US Internet Association of America. They have far more pull and a much better voice in the US government. If you honestly want to see a change in the US laws, this is one organization you need to support.

The EFF is a good organization and they do good things but, if you are in the US and want to join an organization that really has an impact on the legislature and has done more than the EFF and all other similar organizations combined, you should check out the US Internet Industry Association. This is the only organization that Congress really listens to.

Don't you know, Bernie was a founding member of the US Internet Industry Association. What's next, him holding a "WILL SPAM FOR FOOD" sign at Soldier Field?

Looking at this page it looks like in 1994 a Bernard Shifman was employed by US Robotics and one of the founding members of the US Internet Industry Association.

I'm guessing this is not the same person that is making a total idiot out of himself eight years later. Shifman SR might take a beting or two down the road just for having that name.

A quick Google showed this:

http://www.usiia.org/members/founders.html

His CV shows US Robotics as a previous employer (94' to 96' - same period).

If it is him, then the usiia privacy policy becomes quite entertaining,


http://www.usiia.org/legis/privacy.html

Of course it may not be the same person - apologies if I am mistaken.

A quick Google showed this:

http://www.usiia.org/members/founders.html

His CV shows US Robotics as a previous employer (94' to 96' - same period).

If it is him, then the usiia privacy policy becomes quite entertaining,


http://www.usiia.org/legis/privacy.html

Of course it may not be the same person - apologies if I am mistaken.

For those out there who would like to know the answer to this and also help an organization that is doing more for "our" rights than the ACLU and EFF combined go to the US Internet Industry Association web site and get more information. Not that those organizations aren't doing great things; just that the USIIA is doing much more. This is an organization that everyone in the tech community really needs to get behind. I personally know for a fact that they have a much better rapore with those who make the laws than anyone. (Living here in the Washington DC Metro area has some benifits, though now many).

---

If you would like to "speak with many voices" in the political arena, the US Internet Industry Association is a trade association which advocates (i.e. lobbies for) Internet-friendly legislation. And yes, you can join as an individual member, so it's not just a bunch of large corporations participating.

The best thing anyone can do is to write an actual letter (as mentioned in the original post) and send it to your actual representitive. They only care about comments from their constituants. Make sure that you are polite, brief and "professional". If everyone were to do this it would be just as effective as any of the "Million {whatever} Marchs" that have happened.

Make it a "Million Letter March". It will have an effect.

---