rodriro
join:2007-05-21
Palo Alto, CA
| ISPs Make a Tidy Profit Selling Your Browsing History
Amendment 4. Search and Seizure
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
This amendment protects Americans from unreasonable searches and seizures. A reasonable search is defined as one authorized by a judge who issues a search warrant. A warrant is issued only if there is probable cause. This means that it is likely the search will produce evidence that a particular crime has been committed. A warrant must specify the exadt place to be searched and the things to be seized.
Courts have ruled that in some cased searches are permissible without a warrant. For example, courts have held that police may search a person who is under arrest. The Supreme Court has also upheld the right of police to stop and search a person if the officer reasonably concludes that the suspect may be armed. Furthermore, a warrant is not needed if a person freely consents to a search.
The Supreme Court has ruled that items discovered in the course of an unlawful search may not be used as evidence against the accused during trial for a criminal offense. This ban is called the exclusionary rule. |
|
SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
| said by rodriro  :Amendment 4. Search and Seizure
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
That's really nice that you know what the 4th Amendment is and all, but if the telcos don't have to follow any laws when it comes to snooping, and they're just going to get retroactive immunity anyway thanks to their pets in Congre$$, then nobody else has to follow the laws, either. That's the beauty of having the funds to buy a Senator. |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
 ·Cox HSI
 ·magicjack.com
| reply to rodriro
said by rodriro :This amendment protects Americans from unreasonable searches and seizures. The Bill of Rights were originally intended as a bar against Congress only. This is instructional because the Founders weren't necessarily opposed to these things at the state or private level. Just at the Federal level.
It wasn't until 70 years later that the 14th Amendment *intended* to apply the BoR to state and private infringement. I emphasize "intended" because it wasn't for another 60 years that the Supreme Court began "selectively" incorporating the BoR into the 14th Amendment. Therefore, it wasn't reality until the 1920s, to the 1970s (depending on the clause of the BoR).
However, even after the 14th Amendment and 50 years of "selective incorporation" nobody would say that your consensual, contractual relationship with an ISP that chooses to inspect your packets is an "unwarranted search."
It might be bad. There may be reasons to lobby for greater regulation of ISPs. But, it's not a violation of your 4th amendment protection against unreasonable search.
Mark |
|
SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
| said by amigo_boy :
However, even after the 14th Amendment and 50 years of "selective incorporation" nobody would say that your consensual, contractual relationship with an ISP that chooses to inspect your packets is an "unwarranted search."
Right idea. Wrong analysis. |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy :However, even after the 14th Amendment and 50 years of "selective incorporation" nobody would say that your consensual, contractual relationship with an ISP that chooses to inspect your packets is an "unwarranted search." It might be bad. There may be reasons to lobby for greater regulation of ISPs. But, it's not a violation of your 4th amendment protection against unreasonable search. Mark Yep, you signed away your clickstream data by private contract. No govt can go there. If you don't like it, why did you sign up? No choice, boo hoo, start your own phone company/build your own internet. Can't do that? Not our problem. |
|
