House Passes Email Privacy Act, Requiring Warrants For Obtaining Emails (techcrunch.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: The U.S. House of Representatives has passed H.R. 699, the Email Privacy Act, sending it on to the Senate and from there, hopefully anyhow, to the President. The yeas were swift and unanimous. The bill, which was introduced in the House early last year and quickly found bipartisan support, updates the 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy Act, closing a loophole that allowed emails and other communications to be obtained without a warrant. It's actually a good law, even if it is arriving a couple of decades late. "Under current law, there are more protections for a letter in a filing cabinet than an email on a server," said Congresswoman Suzan Delbene during the debate period. An earlier version of the bill also required that authorities disclose that warrant to the person it affected within 10 days, or 3 if the warrant related to a government entity. That clause was taken out in committee -- something trade groups and some of the Representatives objected to as an unpleasant compromise.

Comments

Doesn't matter

[RoknrolZombie]

The 3 letter agencies are going to do what they want, regardless of what the "law" says, just like they do now.

Re:Doesn't matter

[tom229]

It's really humorous how anarchist the population on this website is becoming. An opportunity to blast the government never seems to be missed, even in an article where they're doing a good thing.

Re:Doesn't matter

[tom229]

I'll assume that's not a serious question. Be careful. When you lose objectivity, you become religious. I certainly wouldn't deny the government has done some shitty things and has ultimately become too inefficient and corrupt for its own good. But, at the end of the day, this is a large group of people, agencies, and bureaucracies all charged with working for the people. It's ridiculous to assume every one of them is out to get us, all the time.

So while we need change, what we certainly don't need is religious idealism. In short, I understand that you're angry, but you're not really helping, and no rational person is taking you seriously.