By Tyler Lacey
Law Enforcement Using Cell Phone Data During Investigations, Privacy Laws Yet to Catch Up
On July 5, The New York Times posted an analysis of the use of cell phone forensics by law enforcement. According to the article, major cell phone service providers receive hundreds of requests each month from law enforcement agencies for data that can be used to track a user’s cell phone. Many of these requests are not backed by search warrants that require a showing of probable cause that a crime has been committed. The article reported that since September 12, 2001, federal prosecutors in New Jersey alone have used cell phone data without search warrants in 98 investigations, resulting in 83 prosecutions. The article also reports that civil liberties groups such as the ACLU are concerned about the loss of privacy caused by modern cell phone technology in combination with the failure of federal privacy law to properly catch up and regulate cell phone tracking.
RIAA Seeks Order Requiring Harvard Professor to Remove “Unauthorized and Illegal” Recordings From Website
On July 6, Wired.com reported that the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) is seeking a court order requiring Harvard Law School Professor Charles Nesson to remove recordings of depositions and telephone conversations regarding an ongoing music piracy lawsuit from his blog. The RIAA argues that the recordings are “unauthorized and illegal,” but Professor Nesson insists that the privacy laws that allegedly prevent him from posting the recordings are “outrageously unconstitutional.” Professor Nesson had previously failed to obtain permission to broadcast a live webcast of the trial.
Network Management Company Tells Canadian Agency Net Neutrality Doesn’t Exist; Regulations Inevitable
On July 6, the CBC reported that the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission held hearings during which representatives from industry and consumer advocacy groups offered their views on the proper way to regulate how internet service providers (ISPs) can manage network traffic. Sandvine, a company that sells traffic management technology to ISPs, said that network congestion disproportionately affects certain types of internet services, and that traffic management could potentially alleviate the inequality. Sandvine argued that net neutrality does not exist because of these inequalities in network traffic, and that network traffic should be managed by ISPs to prioritize certain types of packets. The Public Interest Advocacy Centre stated that packet inspection of the type made possible by Sandvine raises privacy concerns because it allows ISPs to identify the type of applications used by their customers in addition to other personal information. The group warned “there will be abuse” if such prioritization is allowed.