The Constitution and the original Bill of Rights enumerated what rights the states had. Anything not enumermated in the Constitution was supposed to go back to the states, not to the individual. That's why states could still outlaw abortion before the SC found a right to privacy in the Constitution.
So it's up to your state one way or the other to decide whether to give a right to privacy. I don't think it should be that way, I think many of the founders believed in a right to be left alone. But legal history is built on this.
The reason I think Congress could act if they chose to with regard to stores is because you can regulate just about anything under the Commerce Clause. But I'd be happy with state privacy laws.
Most IP attorneys I talk with have no clue about open-source software, let alone non-attorney government employees (unless they really need continuing legal education credits and stumble upon it). I'm glad that the OS community is begining to reach out to this group and not expecting them to shell out $800/day like the OSBC conferences.
I absolutely agree that there should be a fundamental right to privacy, but there is no law to back up what you want. The Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution only supports a right to privacy in your own home (i.e., Lawerence v. Texas). If you want to extend privacy out to the public sector and to private property where the public is invited (such as a store), then you need to be lobbying Congress, as opposed to just proclaiming that this is the way the world should be.
Slashdot Mirror
The Constitution and the original Bill of Rights enumerated what rights the states had. Anything not enumermated in the Constitution was supposed to go back to the states, not to the individual. That's why states could still outlaw abortion before the SC found a right to privacy in the Constitution. So it's up to your state one way or the other to decide whether to give a right to privacy. I don't think it should be that way, I think many of the founders believed in a right to be left alone. But legal history is built on this. The reason I think Congress could act if they chose to with regard to stores is because you can regulate just about anything under the Commerce Clause. But I'd be happy with state privacy laws.
Most IP attorneys I talk with have no clue about open-source software, let alone non-attorney government employees (unless they really need continuing legal education credits and stumble upon it). I'm glad that the OS community is begining to reach out to this group and not expecting them to shell out $800/day like the OSBC conferences.
I absolutely agree that there should be a fundamental right to privacy, but there is no law to back up what you want. The Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution only supports a right to privacy in your own home (i.e., Lawerence v. Texas). If you want to extend privacy out to the public sector and to private property where the public is invited (such as a store), then you need to be lobbying Congress, as opposed to just proclaiming that this is the way the world should be.