Is Your ISP On Your Side?

[no1_vern]

Is Your ISP On Your Side?
Quote "When you use the Internet, you may have an expectation that what you are doing is private. You may even believe your e-mail is only being read by its intended recipient and no one tracks the Web sites you visit or watches your online purchasing habits."

"privacy experts are saying it has become easier for law enforcement authorities to work with ISPs to gather information about individuals suspected of being involved in criminal activities, regardless of whether that activity involves terrorism."

I think a persons privacy should be left alone, but what do you think?

Does your personal privacy outweigh the "chance" you might be a criminal?


Vern

[cracked]

of course privacy should be left alone. i vote we start our own internet and keep it private!!!! muwhawhawha.....

drew

Internet Privacy is an oxymoron, IMO.

If you carry out illegal activities, either on the phone, or on the internet, why would you expect immunity? And if the authorities can't ask telcos or ISP's to help them catch crooks, it'll be a sad day, IMO.

Most of the argument about ISP's divulging info has been about file sharing. The reason it's arguable is because most of don't agree with file sharing laws.

I would venture to suggest we should make more noises about the laws and less about "privacy". Whatever we do on the 'net or by 'phone should be deemed discoverable in a court of law (provided entrapment and other conditions are not broached). So if we do illegal stuff, we should expect ISP's to help provide evidence for prosecution. IMO.

So says me, anyway.

Cheers
Mick the Devil's advocate.

[Chuckiechan]

I think to get your phone records the police need a search warrant. You get a search warrant by showing probably cause, or by lying about it. But either way you have to convince a judge you have a need to know and aren't just "fishing".

[Xtreeme]

Originally posted by mickwish
Internet Privacy is an oxymoron, IMO.

If you carry out illegal activities, either on the phone, or on the internet, why would you expect immunity? And if the authorities can't ask telcos or ISP's to help them catch crooks, it'll be a sad day, IMO.

Most of the argument about ISP's divulging info has been about file sharing. The reason it's arguable is because most of don't agree with file sharing laws.

I would venture to suggest we should make more noises about the laws and less about "privacy". Whatever we do on the 'net or by 'phone should be deemed discoverable in a court of law (provided entrapment and other conditions are not broached). So if we do illegal stuff, we should expect ISP's to help provide evidence for prosecution. IMO.

So says me, anyway.

Cheers
Mick the Devil's advocate.

Thats fine in Australia. But in the US our forfathers died for our right to peace and privacy ABOVE what a gov. thinks-its supposed to be for the people. Not against them. Also we fought for the right to be innocent untill PROVEN guilty. Not the other way around which these laws make it. Like no probable cause for search warrents cause of terrorists. Laimo. What was the reason for looking at my ISP records? Oh just checking-thats not probable cause. Oh cause of terrorists. LOL get real thats just a excuse to further empower a overpowered gov.. And we are being violated by all these new laws formed around homeland security being prisoners in our own country. Ben Franklin said " He who gives up liberty for saftey deserves neither saftey NOR liberty". Hmmmm may we think about that. Then realise that "home land security" is totally against this-and what our founding fathers ideoligy of a true free nation. If your gonna cowar and stay at home locking the doors, afraid to go outside, cross boarders and visit relatives, because of people who may be"evil terrorists" are you truely free? NO. Not in the least. If you violate 10,000 peoples rights to catch one terrorist is it right? Not by a long shot. You might be alive-but happy is a dif. story. "Give me death or give me liberty" LOL theres just to much against all this crap for it to be right-in the USA way of looking at it. I know europeans have a dif outlook on life. Which is fine, you have a dif. life alltogether and I respect that. But the USA is supposed to be dif. But its not. What a sham. I love this nation-but not everything it does. Including the enfringment of ones rights.
So the point maybe well by stealing software you are hurting others hence throwing that out. Well also remember two wrongs dont make a right. Violating ones rights to enforce another. Not right. But they do cause the other guy has more $. Face it. Also think of the golden rule. How would our governments like it if we started demanding new laws diminishing their privacy and rights for them set by us. Hehe, now that would be fair. A gov. TRUELY run by the people, pure democracy. A republic democracy which we have is a farse representation of what the people want due to dirty politics. OK steeping down from crying box.

[Xtreeme]

Originally posted by Chuckiechan
I think to get your phone records the police need a search warrant. You get a search warrant by showing probably cause, or by lying about it. But either way you have to convince a judge you have a need to know and aren't just "fishing".

I wish that was still true. But now it isnt cause of this homeland security act. I know first hand. My buddy woke up with pistols drawn on him and cops yelling" Sir get up now!" it was 5 am. didnt knock at the door. They had to go through 3 doors to get to his bedroom, not one knocked on. And they were looking for his friend who skipped probation. Someone lied and said he was staying there but wasnt. No warrent-they didnt even knock. Hes fighting it now as we speak under the "no forced entry law". But they got him on the warrent part already cause they dont need one anymore. He was told this BY A JUDGE. This whole thing blew my mind! I still cant believe this. A friend of the family-a former prosecuter and his folks told him to sue and I hope he gets mucho $ for it. They had no right to do what they did. I sure wouldnt want to wake up to that. Especially when they had no right to be there. BUT if you stand for it they will get away with it scott free and more and more of our rights go down the drain. We all need to stand up for our rigths and grow a backbone. IMHO. I think what he's doing is right.

True, we have a diff approach to "privacy" Down Under. But I think my point is still valid. If you do illegal stuff, you should be able to be discovered. The point about search warrant is fine - no law enforcement agency should be able to go "fishing" for evidence. That's just ambulance chasing.

Never assume that what you do will not be discoverable. Therein lies the way to prison, if what you are doing is illegal.

I assume the US has DNA testing now that's allowable as evidence in rape and murder cases? What if we said that testing 10 people to catch one was a violation of our right to privacy? So the perp goes free, because Ben Franklin says his rights will be violated. And another rape/murder occurs. Now whose rights are violated?

Almost a Catch-22.

Cheers
Mick

[Xtreeme]

taking ones DNA's isnt like spying on them or breaking into their home/phone tapping without cause though. And those 10guys/gals obviously were at the scene of the crime or had motive and opertunity-neither proven when looking at a ISP. everyone had oppertunity. So if the rape was in a shopping mall where everyone had oppertonity, you would spend all that $ and harrass 1,000 prople. I think not. But I see your point. There must be a compromise, but so far its been all for them and 0 for us. Thats what needs adjusting.

[no1_vern]

Hi chuckie,
That is the point, the government no longer needs to get a judges order to get the information. If a sherriff says to an ISP that he wants information about you he can get it without needing a court order.

Hi Mickwish,
The point is under the new laws they can PRESUME you are GUILTY until you are proven innocent. And can break any of the privacy laws they think they dont need, to get proof that you are guilty.

So with your scenario yes, they can hold you until the dna proof that you are innocent comes back even if it takes 2 or 3 MONTHS to do so, and you can nothing to say about it.

That is a concept that may be allowed in other countries, NOT IN THE USA.

Vern

Originally posted by no1_vern
Hi Mickwish,
The point is under the new laws they can PRESUME you are GUILTY until you are proven innocent. And can break any of the privacy laws they think they dont need, to get proof that you are guilty.

So with your scenario yes, they can hold you until the dna proof that you are innocent comes back even if it takes 2 or 3 MONTHS to do so, and you can nothing to say about it.

That is a concept that may be allowed in other countries, NOT IN THE USA.

Vern

Vern, my other point was about protection of the public (the rights of others to be safe). I agree with the power to hold a suspect until proven innocent, as long as there is a process for doing so. I presume they need to obtain a court order to hold someone over a specified period, and the burden of proof of danger to the public is on the law enforcement agency.

That's the way it works here, at least. Those suspected of serious crimes and likely to re-offend (or abscond), in the opinion of the law enforcemnt agency, can be held, but only with a court order after a specified period (not sure but I think it's longer than 48 hours).

Again, it's about the right of others to be safe. Not about Big Brother's power over the individual.

I agree widespread powers for law enforcement to collect info from ISP's is bad. There must be a process which is applied only after serious criminal activity is suspected (eg virus code release, internet fraud, etc). Wholesale inspection of ISP activity files should not be allowed, unless it is the only way to determine guilt, and even then only specified activity should be checked (not, like, "oh, BTW, we found a whole heap of file-sharing going on when we were looking through stuff on suspicion of fraud" ).

BUT - and I stress - you should NEVER assume your internet access will be treated as private. If you would be in trouble with the law if it was detected, you shouldn't do it. Period.

Cheers
Mick