Slashdot Mirror


The Dead Past: the Biggest Threat To Privacy Is Us

An anonymous reader writes "Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals candidly discusses the future of privacy law in an essay published today in the Stanford Law Review Online. Referencing an Isaac Asimov short story, Kozinski acknowledges a serious threat to our privacy — but not from corporations, courts, or Congress: 'Judges, legislators and law enforcement officials live in the real world. The opinions they write, the legislation they pass, the intrusions they dare engage in—all of these reflect an explicit or implicit judgment about the degree of privacy we can reasonably expect by living in our society. In a world where employers monitor the computer communications of their employees, law enforcement officers find it easy to demand that internet service providers give up information on the web-browsing habits of their subscribers.'" (Excerpt continues below.) "In a world where people post up-to-the-minute location information through Facebook Places or Foursquare, the police may feel justified in attaching a GPS to your car. In a world where people tweet about their sexual experiences and eager thousands read about them the morning after, it may well be reasonable for law enforcement, in pursuit of terrorists and criminals, to spy with high-powered binoculars through people's bedroom windows or put concealed cameras in public restrooms. In a world where you can listen to people shouting lurid descriptions of their gall-bladder operations into their cell phones, it may well be reasonable to ask telephone companies or even doctors for access to their customer records. If we the people don't consider our own privacy terribly valuable, we cannot count on government — with its many legitimate worries about law-breaking and security — to guard it for us.'"

6 of 130 comments (clear)

  1. Wat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because I choose to disclose something about myself -one way-, I necessarily want to allow -every- method of accessing that information and every possible use of it? Hogwash.

    1. Re:Wat? by interkin3tic · · Score: 5, Funny

      One wonders if the good judge would object to the police having sex with his wife. After all, he has sex with her. Obviously he doesn't consider her chastity to be terribly valuable.

    2. Re:Wat? by dgatwood · · Score: 5, Informative

      Worse than that. What the judge is saying is effectively that because you choose to disclose things about yourself, that it is reasonable for police to force me to disclose those same things about myself.

      Rights do not cease to be rights merely because the majority of people do not exercise them; so long as even one person considers something to be private, the state has no legitimate authority to treat it otherwise unless failure to do so would pose an immediate threat of grave harm to another person. Period.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    3. Re:Wat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I think his point is that he clearly would object. His point is that society is collectively tweaking the norm of what is acceptable, and the police and politicians are exploiting this. Simply realizing and acknowledging this is the first part of fighting back: there is a difference between you selecting what to disclose and the police taking a single disclosure as tacit approval for taking everything they can.

    4. Re:Wat? by S77IM · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Let me rephrase your rephrase:
      "Law enforcement will not respect people who do not respect themselves."

      --
      Student: Is it true that the foundation of the universe is paradox?
      Master: Well, yes and no.
  2. Community Standards by djl4570 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Some years ago an ambitious prosecutor in Utah filed criminal charges against an adult entertainment store alleging obscenity in the adult videos that were rented or sold. The attorneys decided to establish community standards by demand a rental record of adult videos from all of the Salt Lake City hotels and video rental outlets. The charges were dropped when it became evident that the videos were within community standards. It worked out well for the accused in this example.
    What the judge is saying is that if our social and or community standards for privacy are low then the government will have a low standard for guarding privacy. If it becomes normal and acceptable to post lurid pictures of yourself all over the net then we have little complaint if the government looks at these photos. Consider the few cases where criminals have posted online boasts about criminal activity, and in some cases displaying the stolen goods. Law enforcement comes calling and those posts are evidence against them. The judge is giving us a fair warning about the possible direction of privacy case law.