Text of the 4th amendment does not include cell phones and internet

[Quantum Windbag]

Those aren't my records. They are the property of the phone company. The suggestion that a private business doesn't own the records of the transactions it makes that it keeps in its own physical possession is quite absurd, actually. If those records were in fact my own property, I should be able to walk into Verizon and demand the originals be turned over to me any time I like, under penalty of law. But I can't, can I?

If you store your documents in a bank safety deposit box do they belong to the bank?

If you go to the doctor does he won the results of your medical tests?

The suggestion that you understand basic arithmetic is ludicrous, no one expects you to actually grasp a complex subject like privacy.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

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.

Persons, houses, papers, and effects. Doesn't say anything about data that I send streaming out of my house into the public air space.


Sad to say this - but anyone who thought cell phones were private doesn't watch enough television. Hell I can remember when they first came out and they were "car phones". My father's law partner who was running for DA later figured out that his opponent was listening in on his cell phone conversations. I've never considered cell phones to be a 100% private method of communication

What kind of American supports the philosophy you just espoused?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

A cell phone is an "effect" as it is your personal property.


But the electromagnetic radiation it emits?

The record of an email I send that resides on a company's server - I don't own the server, do I?

You are, in effect, renting space on the server. Your information belongs to you.

I don't pay gmail a cent for the service. Either way, the server is their property (or the property of someone they may be leasing it from) - not mine. That's a bit like saying that by sending a package in the mail I'm renting a truck.

I pay for my email. Just because you are a cheap ass bitch doesn't mean everyone is.

 

[PaulS1950]

According to the copyright laws in the USA this note is automatically my property when I write it. The entire database that it is stored in is copyright protected as the property of the owner of the database. None of what any of us write is "open source" or public in any way.

The police say that they can video record anyone in public but that they cannot be video taped in public. Why are they immune from the same surveillance to which we are subject?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Persons, houses, papers, and effects. Doesn't say anything about data that I send streaming out of my house into the public air space.


Sad to say this - but anyone who thought cell phones were private doesn't watch enough television. Hell I can remember when they first came out and they were "car phones". My father's law partner who was running for DA later figured out that his opponent was listening in on his cell phone conversations. I've never considered cell phones to be a 100% private method of communication

Uhm, maybe because they didn't exist in the 18th century?

I'm pretty sure they had electromagnetic radiation in the 18th century.

This is the board expert that claims to be an astrophysicist, but he thinks Faraday was alive in the 16th century. He probably doesn't even know when Herschel discovered that some light is invisible.

I am pretty sure they didn't know about it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Being secure in MY property. Things that I send beaming out into the public outside of my home or other property - whether it be smoke signals or electromagnetic radiation - no longer belongs to me. Do you think the Founders would have considered the recording of smoke signal communications by the government to be a violation of privacy?

Yes. Particularly since it was government seizure of written communications that inspired the amendment.

So let me get this straight - its your belief that the intent of the 4th amendment is that the government isn't even allowed to look at the sky?

A written communication that I have entrusted to an agent of mine to carry is still my own property until the intended recipient receives it, at which point it becomes their property. A written communication that I drop from a hot air balloon or shoot out of a cannon becomes the property of whomever finds it.

No, it is my opinion that you are an idiot who lies about his job in order to make believe he isn't really a janitor.

 

[PaulS1950]

Electromagnetic radiation has existed for at least 13 billion years. The post said he was pretty sure they had it - not that they knew anything about it.

Your uneducated comments about his education failed when you showed that you couldn't read what he wrote.

 

[Avatar4321]

Being secure in MY property. Things that I send beaming out into the public outside of my home or other property - whether it be smoke signals or electromagnetic radiation - no longer belongs to me. Do you think the Founders would have considered the recording of smoke signal communications by the government to be a violation of privacy?

Yes. Particularly since it was government seizure of written communications that inspired the amendment.

So let me get this straight - its your belief that the intent of the 4th amendment is that the government isn't even allowed to look at the sky?

A written communication that I have entrusted to an agent of mine to carry is still my own property until the intended recipient receives it, at which point it becomes their property. A written communication that I drop from a hot air balloon or shoot out of a cannon becomes the property of whomever finds it.

A written communication, intercepted in transit by a government official without probable cause, is illegally obtained. My phone is just that. My phone. It's not Verizon's or AT&Ts or any other company you want to use. My computer is just that. My computer. My email is My email. These are my effects. So yes, they are protected under the 4th amendment.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Electromagnetic radiation has existed for at least 13 billion years. The post said he was pretty sure they had it - not that they knew anything about it.

Your uneducated comments about his education failed when you showed that you couldn't read what he wrote.

He responded to a poster that said they didn't know about things like cell phones and electromagnetic radiation by claiming they existed, even if they didn't know about them? Is that really the position you want to argue? I thought you were smarter than that, I guess I was wrong.

By the way, I didn't comment on his education, I commented on his credibility.For all I know he has multiple degrees in women's studies and art theory. That doesn't make him any more credible when he claims that cell phones are not covered by the 4th Amendment.

 

[PaulS1950]

Any document whether electronic or on paper is the copyright property of the author. It doesn't matter whether it is on the internet or a piece of paper. Our copyright laws are very specific about any information, in any form, whether it is music, a note, a book or a choreography belong solely to the person that wrote it. It is their property. It is therefore protected by the fourth amendment.

Ignorance of the law aside, you really should understand what your rights are supposed to be before you engage in a discussion of the same.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Any document whether electronic or on paper is the copyright property of the author. It doesn't matter whether it is on the internet or a piece of paper. Our copyright laws are very specific about any information, in any form, whether it is music, a note, a book or a choreography belong solely to the person that wrote it. It is their property. It is therefore protected by the fourth amendment.

Ignorance of the law aside, you really should understand what your rights are supposed to be before you engage in a discussion of the same.

Copyright has nothing to do with the 4th Amendment.

 

[Avatar4321]

Any document whether electronic or on paper is the copyright property of the author. It doesn't matter whether it is on the internet or a piece of paper. Our copyright laws are very specific about any information, in any form, whether it is music, a note, a book or a choreography belong solely to the person that wrote it. It is their property. It is therefore protected by the fourth amendment.

Ignorance of the law aside, you really should understand what your rights are supposed to be before you engage in a discussion of the same.

Copyright has nothing to do with the 4th Amendment.

Not a bad argument though.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Any document whether electronic or on paper is the copyright property of the author. It doesn't matter whether it is on the internet or a piece of paper. Our copyright laws are very specific about any information, in any form, whether it is music, a note, a book or a choreography belong solely to the person that wrote it. It is their property. It is therefore protected by the fourth amendment.

Ignorance of the law aside, you really should understand what your rights are supposed to be before you engage in a discussion of the same.

Copyright has nothing to do with the 4th Amendment.

Not a bad argument though.

It actually is, because copyright is limited in scope, and only protects me from people making money off of my work. The 4th Amendment, on the other hand, protects me from the government even reading it.