Comcast Charges $1000 Per Wiretap

It seems trashing the Fourth Amendment is very profitable: For one company, FISA wiretaps carry a $1K pricetag

Comcast, which is among the nation's largest telecommunication companies, charges $1,000 to install a FISA wiretap and $750 for each additional month authorities want to keep an eye on suspects, according to the company's Handbook for Law Enforcement. Secrecy News obtained the document and published it Monday.

Comments

illegal?

[kharchenko]

It talks about FISA-court approved wiretaps ... how come the title says illegal?

Re:illegal?

[grylnsmn]

Actually, you are way off base, for several reasons.

Yes, you are protected against unreasonable searches and seizures, but the presumption is that because a warrant is only issued by a judge "upon probable cause", a search based on that warrant is not unreasonable, because it is "supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized", and there are penalties for perjury.

There is also nothing in the Fourth Amendment that requires that you be informed of a warrant issued against you before it is carried out (in fact, if you were notified of a wiretap warrant, the wiretap would be completely useless, regardless of whether the court that issued it was a "secret court" or not).

Finally, what does the "right to a fair trial by jury of your peers" have to do with warrants and wiretaps? Warrants and wiretaps are used prior to the trial to gather evidence. The trial is when it is presented to the judge and jury. In fact, the FISA court does not hear criminal cases. It only handles matters like issuing warrants and reviewing of classified information.

So, where is any of that a violation of the Constitution?

Re:illegal?

[jabster]

Stop that.

I read smatterings of logic and intelligence in your post.

This is slashdot.

We will have none of that here.

Now be off with you.

-john

Escalating Prices

[Cryophallion]

After announcing this, they notified the black market that it would be $2,000.00 a month to notify people being illegally tapped that they were being illegally tapped.

When confronted by the govt, they let them know that secrecy, much like their internet connection uptime, is in no way guaranteed under the current terms.

For guaranteed privacy, it is $5,000.00 per month. However, if they only listen on nights and weekends, the fee is slightly reduced.

Talk about creating shareholder value!

Re:Well, hrm.

[baldass_newbie]

On one hand, I find FISA absolutely disgusting and weep as our mighty country has fallen into tyranny and darkness.

FISA has been around since 1978. How long have you been lamenting the descent?

FISA Wiretaps are *not* illegal.

[DragonPup]

If it truly a FISA wiretap, than the authorities obtained a warrant from a judge. What Bush does with warrantless wiretaps are *not* FISA wiretaps because no warrants are involved.

Now, if you want to debate the Constitutionality of a FISA wiretap, that is a valid discussion, but the story does not even contain the word illegal anywhere. Read your own frakking article, and try to keep your story truthful.

Dear shadow government...

[tgd]

If you would like to tap my internet and phones, I can cut out the middle man and give you what you need for a one-time setup cost of $600, and the low low price of $450 per month.

(Now, if the monitoring program is secret, what can the IRS do if I don't report that income?)

Scary accounting

[Loosifur]

Best line from the article:

"I was actually surprised that this was such a routine transaction that it would have a set fee," said Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists' Project on Government Secrecy.

Two things that I find strange. First, take this out of the context of FISA. If a state prosecutor, say, subpoenas records from a private business, do they routinely pay said business for the processing? Generally speaking, it seems that when a court orders something, you don't get paid for the time or effort. Even if you hire a lawyer to handle the subpoena process you don't get reimbursed for that. Maybe someone with some inside knowledge can fill me in here, but wouldn't you have to file a petition to have any processing costs refunded?

Second thing that's a little quirky, why is there a maintenance fee? Why is there an initial cost? I wouldn't think that it's Comcast's own techs doing the surveillance. After all, when phone lines are tapped Verizon guys don't do the tapping. Is it to compensate for lost bandwidth? Doesn't seem likely. Again, if someone knows better, please fill me in, but it seems a bit strange that Comcast is able to charge money to allow the government to perform court-ordered surveillance.

Re:Let's Look at the Fourth Amendment!

[funkyloki]

I agree. You only have to listen to the rhetoric spouted by Bush and Congress to know what they are doing is illegal. First, they tell us that nothing the phone companies have done is illegal and they have acted in "good faith". Then, they tell us because the phone companies, and this includes Comcast, have been so helpful, that they should be granted immunity from their actions retroactive back to 2001. It doesn't take Einstein to figure out that if they had done nothing wrong, then there would be no reason to grant immunity. The fact that they are asking for it means they know they acted irresponsibly with their customer's info, and illegally.
The fact that Comcast also makes money off of these wiretaps is outrageous. That's incentive for them to keep violating the Fourth Amendment whenever asked by the government, regardless of legal grounds to do so.