Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Privacy

Submission + - The iPhone Meets the Fourth Amendment (ssrn.com) 3

background image writes: According to Alan M Gershowitz, the doctrine of "search incident to arrest" may allow devices such as mobile phones, pdas and laptops to be thoroughly searched without either probable cause or warrants, and incriminating evidence found in such searches may be used against you whether or not it is germane to the reason for the original arrest.

Imagine that police arrest an individual for a simple traffic infraction, such as running a stop sign. Under the search incident to arrest doctrine, officers are entitled to search the body of the person they are arresting to ensure that he does not have any weapons or will not destroy any evidence. The search incident to an arrest is automatic and allows officers to open containers on the person, even if there is no probable cause to believe there is anything illegal inside of those containers. What happens, however, when the arrestee is carrying an iPhone in his pocket? May the police search the iPhone's call history, cell phone contacts, emails, pictures, movies, calendar entries and, perhaps most significantly, the browsing history from recent internet use? Under longstanding Supreme Court precedent decided well before handheld technology was even contemplated, the answer appears to be yes.

Privacy

Submission + - Privacy and the "Nothing to Hide" Argument 1

privacyprof writes: One of the most common responses of those unconcerned about government surveillance or privacy invasions is "I've got nothing to hide." According to the "nothing to hide" argument, there is no threat to privacy unless the government uncovers unlawful activity, in which case a person has no legitimate justification to claim that it remain private. The "nothing to hide" argument is quite prevalent. Is there a way to respond to the "nothing to hide" argument that would really register with people in the general public? In a short essay, "I've Got Nothing to Hide" and Other Misunderstandings of Privacy, Professor Daniel Solove takes on the "nothing to hide" argument and exposes its faulty underpinnings.
Software

Submission + - ODF Legislation: And California Makes Four

Andy Updegrove writes: "A legislator in California has decided that it's time for California to become the latest U.S. State to get on the open formats bandwagon. If all of the bills filed in the last few weeks pass, California, Texas and Minnesota will all require, in near-identical language, that "all documents, including, but not limited to, text, spreadsheets, and presentations, produced by any state agency shall be created, exchanged, and preserved in an open extensible markup language-based, XML-based file format." What type of formats will qualify? Again, the language is very uniform (the following is from the California statute): "When deciding how to implement this section, the department in its evaluation of open, XML-based file formats shall consider all of the following features: (1) Interoperable among diverse internal and external platforms and applications; (2) Fully published and available royalty-free; (3) Implemented by multiple vendors; (4) Controlled by an open industry organization with a well-defined inclusive process for evolution of the standard. " Meanwhile, while ODF is enjoying a romp to multiple statehouses, Ecma is about to release its reactions to the 20 responses filed commenting on its Microsoft OOXML-based Ecma standard.
http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/articl e.php?story=20070228080638136"

Slashdot Top Deals

"It is easier to fight for principles than to live up to them." -- Alfred Adler

Working...