Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

ACLU Sues Anaheim Police For Public Records On Cell Phone Surveillance (scpr.org)

Posted by timothy on from the round-antennae-on-each-side-of-the-head dept.

New submitter Lacey Waymire writes: The ACLU of Northern California is suing for a release of public records regarding Anaheim police's use of cell phone surveillance devices. "We don't think any surveillance devices, particularly these sorts of invasive cell phone surveillance devices, should ever be acquired or used without intense public debate and the adoption of safeguards to ensure they are only used in ways that follow our Constitution and laws," attorney Matt Cagle said. (See this Boing Boing posting with a bit more on "the happiest surveillance state on earth.")

17 of 29 comments (clear)

  1. Can the ACLU protect the ENTIRE Constitution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    In particular the 2nd and 10th Amendments....

    1. Re:Can the ACLU protect the ENTIRE Constitution? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sure, as soon as the NRA and Republican Party support the 8th, 16th, 17th, 24th and 26th Amendments.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re:Can the ACLU protect the ENTIRE Constitution? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      You nigger.

      Pro 1st Amendment argument, #47.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:Can the ACLU protect the ENTIRE Constitution? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Executions have never been "cruel and unusual".

      Wrong.

      http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.or...

      Funny thing, poll taxes were a Democrat invention. Trying to claim that requiring an ID to vote is the same is lying, sophistry at best.

      Which were outlawed in 1964, and brought back by the GOP starting in 2010.

      http://nymag.com/daily/intelli...

      Seriously? When have Republicans EVER attempted to prevent someone older than 18 from voting because of their age?

      Started in 2008, and accelerated in 2012.

      http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12...

      You could have easily checked these things for yourself before posting.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  2. Re:Fuck Your Political Agenda, New Guys. by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

    WE don't give a fuck about politics. Tell us about the tech in the surveillance equipment.

    You speak for everyone?

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  3. Re:Fuck Your Political Agenda, New Guys. by meerling · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately, these types of actions, political or not, will severely impact and otherwise influence the development, deployment, and accessibility of tech.
    Of course if you want to play ostrich, nobody is stopping you, but don't try to force others to play with you.

  4. Re:Fuck Your Political Agenda, New Guys. by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    He speaks for Boskon

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  5. Nondisclosure agreements by NormAtHome · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There have been plenty of instances where people have tried to pry open the "secret" door number 3" and look at whats inside. In lots of news articles each agency (state and federal) has cited a legally binding nondisclosure agreement with the manufacturer as to why they aren't allowed to disclose any information regarding the use and specifications of the so called Stingray device. Until some court invalidates the NDA good luck getting any information on those things. It seems to me since federal and state money is being spent on these things the public has a certain right to know how much. Also I believe that there are several court cases pending where stingrays were used to catch the perpetrator and the defense has tried to subpoena data about them and has never been successful.

    1. Re:Nondisclosure agreements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Also I believe that there are several court cases pending where stingrays were used to catch the perpetrator and the defense has tried to subpoena data about them and has never been successful.

      Even better, the prosecutors dropped the charges. They're so afraid of having this technology evaluated in front of a judge, they're willing to drop criminal charges to keep the Stingray workings a secret.

    2. Re:Nondisclosure agreements by wbr1 · · Score: 1

      That's because a smart investigator/prosecutor uses the stingray in conjunction with parallel construction. No need to even bring it up then.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
    3. Re:Nondisclosure agreements by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      NDA vs discovery in an open court for a skilled legal team?
      Offer a letter that has a very good deal early on? No more lawyer asking questions in open court.
      Ensure no funds can be found or accessed to get a good private legal team and needed local experts. Offer other legal services that have less funds to legally trace a case back to its origins.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re:Nondisclosure agreements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      You see, the whole "NDAs that are legally binding" argument seems like complete BS. IANAL, but in my adult life having to deal with quite a few contracts, I have learned a few things. One of them being that contract law is literally the lowest form of law in existence. If a clause in a contract contradicts a law at any higher level, that clause is automatically null and void. If I sign a contract that says you are allowed to kill me, if you kill me, that clause in the contract will be found void, and you will still be found guilty of murder. If I sign a contract stating that I will not sue if I'm injured while participating in an event, but it is found the people running the event were negligent, that clause becomes void and I can sue. It happens over and over. The case law on this is abundant, contract law is one of the lowest, if not the lowest form of law and is superseded by anything higher. And now you have FOIA, a federal law which is one of the highest levels of law which most certainly states that this information must be provided. According to so much case law, certainly that NDA is immediately rendered null and void since it contradicts a federal law. No, this is the government making BS excuses, nothing more. I hate to say it, but a case like this is already settled. Contracts are always overruled by laws.

    5. Re: Nondisclosure agreements by phorm · · Score: 1

      My understanding on the injury clauses is that
      A) It forces at least a formal signed acknowledgement of the potential for injury
      B) It reduces since of the not frivolous injury claims

  6. Re:Fuck Your Political Agenda, New Guys. by SeaFox · · Score: 1

    Lets discuss how to get engineers to quit designing shit that gets used by the police state in a constitutionally illegal manner.

    Yes, lets stop working on any advances in carbon nanotubes, especially. Because someone might use that technology to build a gun that can use high powered rounds but isn't a material that can be picked up by airline security scans.

  7. Re:This is not constructive by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    How 'bout Slashdotters calmly discuss the US Presidentials candidates positions on state sponsored surveillance of its citizens.

    The leading candidate for one of the parties says that if he's elected, we'll have the classiest, swankiest surveillance state of all countries in the world. It'll be so great it'll make your head spin. And we'll make people with vowels at the end of their name pay for it.

    Me? I like Ike.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  8. Re:Fuck Your Political Agenda, New Guys. by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

    You speak for everyone?

    No. The OP was using the pregnant "we."

    --
    Good, inexpensive web hosting
  9. Re:Fuck Your Political Agenda, New Guys. by spartacus_prime · · Score: 1

    And ethics in games journalism, right?

    --
    If you can read this, it means that I bothered to log in.