[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

more ISP random monitoring of email Re: US vs Councilman 03-1383 Re: Addendum III(this is the end for now)Re: Addendem II Re: Addendum Re: The legal basis for Service monitoring Title 18 Section 2702.6A Re: Why TOR Operators SHOULD always sniff their exit traffic...

this is yet another legal opinion on the issue of warrant less interception of email via ISP being forwarded to law enforcements

The John Marhsall Journal<br>of<br>Computer & Information Law<hr>A publication of the Center for Information Technology and Privacy Law of<br>The John Marshall Law School

Journal Home Page <http://www.jcil.org>
About the Journal <http://www.jcil.org/journal/about/index.html> Past Issues <http://www.jcil.org/journal/issue/index.html> Search the Archives <http://www.jcil.org/journal/search/index.html> Ordering Information <http://www.jcil.org/journal/order/index.html> Manuscript Submission <http://www.jcil.org/journal/submission/index.html> Candidate Information <http://www.jcil.org/journal/candidate/index.html> Contact the Journal <http://www.jcil.org/journal/contact/index.html> <http://www.jcil.org/journal/turkeys/index.html>


The Fourth Amendment and the Wiretap Act Fail to Protect Against Random ISP Monitoring of E-mails for the Purpose of Assisting Law Enforcement


Jim W. Ko


VOL. XXII • Winter 2004 • NO. 2 (table of contents) <http://www.jcil.org/journal/issue/62.html>

Order this issue <http://www.jcil.org/journal/subscribe/order.html?vol=62>


This article takes the position that the Wiretap Act and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) does little to provide protection against internet service providers (ISPs) that randomly monitor e-mails for the purpose of turning over evidence of criminal activities to law enforcement officials. The article provides a background to the special privacy issues that arise in the context of computer technology and ISPs. An analysis of the Wiretap Act, as amended by the ECPA, reveals that an implicit statutory prohibition against random surveillance by ISPs for the purpose of assisting law enforcement does in fact exist. Further, remedies for violations of this provision are deficient because of many exceptions, and because criminal sanctions and the exclusionary rule are not included. Recent court decisions are analyzed which collectively suggest that the Fourth Amendment does not protect against evidence obtained from ISP surveillance. Finally, the article concludes by providing suggestions as to how the public’s privacy interests against random ISP monitoring can and should be protected.

Related Articles:


Bench Memorandum: Whether the Monitoring and Recording of a Voice Mail Message in the Work Place Constitutes a Violation of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act or an Invasion of Privacy <http://www.jcil.org/journal/articles/209.html>


Privacy on Federal Civilian Computer Networks: A Fourth Amendment Analysis of the Federal Intrusion Detection Network <http://www.jcil.org/journal/articles/193.html>


The Electronic Communications Privacy Act: Does the Answer to the Internet Information Privacy Problem Lie in a Fifteen Year Old Federal Statute? A Detailed Analysis <http://www.jcil.org/journal/articles/141.html>


Warrantless Satellite Surveillance: Will our 4th Amendment Privacy Rights be Lost in Space? <http://www.jcil.org/journal/articles/353.html>


/State v. Donis:/ The New Jersey Supreme Court Turns Its Back While Police Conduct Random Mobile Data Terminal Searches <http://www.jcil.org/journal/articles/229.html>

Copyright © 2005 The John Marshall Law School <http://www.jmls.edu/> | 315 S. Plymouth Court, Chicago IL 60604 | 312.987.2354
Cite as: John Marshall J. of Comp. & Info. Law | Copyright Permission <http://www.jcil.org/journal/legal/copyright.html> | Terms of Use <http://www.jcil.org/journal/legal/terms.html> | Privacy Policy <http://www.jcil.org/journal/legal/privacy.html>