Visit ArabTopics.com

Analog Equivalent Rights (8/21): Using Third-Party Services Should Not Void Expectation of Privacy

here-are-your-car-keys-picture-id637990904

Privacy: Ross Ulbricht handed in his appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court last week, highlighting an important Analog Equivalent Privacy Right in the process: Just because you’re using equipment that makes a third party aware of your circumstances, does that really nullify any expectation of privacy?

In most constitutions, there’s a protection of privacy of some kind. In the European Charter of Human Rights, this is specified as having the right to private and family life, home, and correspondence. In the U.S. Constitution, it’s framed slightly differently, but with the same outcome: it’s a ban for the government to invade privacy without good cause (“unreasonable search and seizure”).

U.S. Courts have long held, that if you have voluntarily given up some part of your digitally-stored privacy to a third party, then you can no longer expect to have privacy in that area. When looking at analog equivalence for privacy rights, this doctrine is atrocious, and in order to understand just how atrocious, we need to go back to the dawn of the manual telephone switchboards.

At the beginning of the telephone age, switchboards were fully manual. When you requested a telephone call, a manual switchboard operator would manually connect the wire from your telephone to the wire of the receiver’s telephone, and crank a mechanism that would make that telephone ring. The operators could hear every call if they wanted and knew who had been talking to whom and when.

Did you give up your privacy to a third party when using this manual telephone service? Yes, arguably, you did. Under the digital doctrine applied now, phonecalls would have no privacy at all, under any circumstance. But as we know, phonecalls are private. In fact, the phonecall operators were oathsworn to never utter the smallest part of what they learned on the job about people’s private dealings — so seriously was privacy considered, even by the companies running the switchboards.

Interestingly enough, this “third-party surrender of privacy” doctrine seems to have appeared the moment the last switchboard operator left their job for today’s automated phone-circuit switches. This was as late as 1983, just at the dawn of digital consumer-level technology such as the Commodore 64.

This false equivalence alone should be sufficient to scuttle the doctrine of “voluntarily” surrendering privacy to a third party in the digital world, and therefore giving up expectation of privacy: the equivalence in the analog world was the direct opposite.

But there’s more to the analog equivalent of third-party-service privacy. Somewhere in this concept is the notion that you’re voluntarily choosing to give up your privacy, as an active informed act — in particular, an act that stands out of the ordinary, since the Constitutions of the world are very clear that the ordinary default case is that you have an expectation of privacy.

In other words, since people’s everyday lives are covered by expectations of privacy, there must be something outside of the ordinary that a government can claim gives it the right to take away somebody’s privacy. And this “outside the ordinary” has been that the people in question were carrying a cellphone, and so “voluntarily” gave up their right to privacy, as the cellphone gives away their location to the network operator by contacting cellphone towers.

But carrying a cellphone is expected behavior today. It is completely within the boundaries of “ordinary”. In terms of expectations, this doesn’t differ much from wearing jeans or a jacket. This leads us to the question; in the thought experiment that yesterday’s jeans manufacturers had been able to pinpoint your location, had it been reasonable for the government to argue that you give up any expectation of privacy when you’re wearing jeans?

No. No, of course it hadn’t.

It’s not like you’re carrying a wilderness tracking device for the express purpose of rescue services to find you during a dangerous hike. In such a circumstance, it could be argued that you’re voluntarily carrying a locator device. But not when carrying something that everybody is expected to carry — indeed, something that everybody must carry in order to even function in today’s society.

When the only alternative to having your Constitutionally-guaranteed privacy is exile from modern society, a government should have a really thin case. Especially when the analog equivalent — analog phone switchboards — was never fair game in any case.

People deserve Analog Equivalent Privacy Rights.

Until a government recognizes this and voluntarily surrenders a power it has taken itself, which isn’t something people should hold their breath over, privacy remains your own responsibility.

(This is a post from Falkvinge on Liberty, obtained via RSS at this feed.)

Source: 
Rick Falkvinge

Dear friends of this aggregator

  • Yes, I intentionally removed Newsbud from the aggregator on Mar 22.
  • Newsbud did not block the aggregator, although their editor blocked me on twitter after a comment I made to her
  • As far as I know, the only site that blocks this aggregator is Global Research. I have no idea why!!
  • Please stop recommending Newsbud and Global Research to be added to the aggregator.

Support this site

News Sources

Source Items
WWI Hidden History 50
Grayzone Project 60
Pass Blue 134
Dilyana Gaytandzhieva 14
John Pilger 415
The Real News 367
Scrutinised Minds 29
Need To Know News 2146
FEE 3975
Marine Le Pen 288
Francois Asselineau 25
Opassande 53
HAX on 5July 220
Henrik Alexandersson 731
Mohamed Omar 297
Professors Blog 10
Arg Blatte Talar 40
Angry Foreigner 17
Fritte Fritzson 12
Teologiska rummet 32
Filosofiska rummet 91
Vetenskapsradion Historia 139
Snedtänkt (Kalle Lind) 199
Les Crises 2363
Richard Falk 141
Ian Sinclair 92
SpinWatch 56
Counter Currents 7764
Kafila 407
Gail Malone 34
Transnational Foundation 221
Rick Falkvinge 94
The Duran 8521
Vanessa Beeley 93
Nina Kouprianova 9
MintPress 5308
Paul Craig Roberts 1448
News Junkie Post 58
Nomi Prins 27
Kurt Nimmo 191
Strategic Culture 4229
Sir Ken Robinson 20
Stephan Kinsella 79
Liberty Blitzkrieg 831
Sami Bedouin 62
Consortium News 2357
21 Century Wire 3257
Burning Blogger 318
Stephen Gowans 76
David D. Friedman 148
Anarchist Standard 16
The BRICS Post 1496
Tom Dispatch 465
Levant Report 18
The Saker 3871
The Barnes Review 501
John Friend 410
Psyche Truth 146
Jonathan Cook 135
New Eastern Outlook 3533
School Sucks Project 1757
Giza Death Star 1738
Andrew Gavin Marshall 15
Red Ice Radio 589
GMWatch 2046
Robert Faurisson 150
Espionage History Archive 34
Jay's Analysis 853
Le 4ème singe 88
Jacob Cohen 203
Agora Vox 13386
Cercle Des Volontaires 427
Panamza 1927
Fairewinds 109
Project Censored 807
Spy Culture 446
Conspiracy Archive 70
Crystal Clark 11
Timothy Kelly 527
PINAC 1482
The Conscious Resistance 705
Independent Science News 70
The Anti Media 6152
Positive News 820
Brandon Martinez 30
Steven Chovanec 61
Lionel 276
The Mind renewed 434
Natural Society 2563
Yanis Varoufakis 900
Tragedy & Hope 122
Dr. Tim Ball 97
Web of Debt 136
Porkins Policy Review 386
Conspiracy Watch 174
Eva Bartlett 579
Libyan War Truth 304
DeadLine Live 1909
Kevin Ryan 62
BSNEWS 2014
Aaron Franz 209
Traces of Reality 166
Revelations Radio News 121
Dr. Bruce Levine 134
Peter B Collins 1456
Faux Capitalism 205
Dissident Voice 10069
Climate Audit 222
Donna Laframboise 397
Judith Curry 1095
Geneva Business Insider 40
Media Monarchy 2179
Syria Report 76
Human Rights Investigation 90
Intifada (Voice of Palestine) 1685
Down With Tyranny 10976
Laura Wells Solutions 39
Video Rebel's Blog 420
Revisionist Review 485
Aletho News 19098
ضد العولمة 27
Penny for your thoughts 2847
Northerntruthseeker 2218
كساريات 37
Color Revolutions and Geopolitics 27
Stop Nato 4690
AntiWar.com Blog 2866
AntiWar.com Original Content 6527
Corbett Report 2203
Stop Imperialism 491
Land Destroyer 1147
Webster Tarpley Website 1040

Compiled Feeds

Public Lists

Title Visibility
Funny Public