backtop

Print 15 comment(s) - last by farbdogg.. on May 27 at 11:37 PM
The EFF and AT&T are heading to court over allegations that the phone company violated the privacy of its customers

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is currently sueing AT&T for helping the National Security Agency (NSA) execute wiretaps on American citizens without filing warrants.  The EFF alledges that not only did AT&T let the NSA intercept and analyze millions of phone calls made by Americans, but  the company has also been accused of giving the NSA direct access to databases of communication records.

There is much more on the subject from the EFF Class Action Lawsuit page here. 



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
About Time.
By phisrow on 2/1/2006 4:25:31 AM , Rating: 2
Hopefully the case will bring to light full documentation of what exactly they've been up to. A stiff smack to keep their hands out of the cookie jar in the future would be nice as well.




RE: About Time.
By dmcanally on 2/1/2006 8:28:07 AM , Rating: 3
IMHO they need more than a stiff smack. I think heads should roll for this (not literally). The wiretaps are a disgusting act of treason against the American people.


RE: About Time.
By igloo15 on 2/1/2006 9:45:19 AM , Rating: 2
I might be the only person that feels this way but i too disagree with wiretaps though in the same sense i know they are necessary. Wiretaps is the kinda thing the public should not know about the kind of thing the government does but no one ever hears about. The fact that Bush and others have brought to light the wiretaps was a stupid stupid move. Wiretaps no one knows about are fine wiretaps everyone knows about bad!


RE: About Time.
By chizzle on 2/1/2006 10:24:00 AM , Rating: 3
I have no problems with the wiretaps as long as it's been approved by courts.


RE: About Time.
By smitty3268 on 2/1/2006 12:11:12 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly!!! Wiretaps are good, I'd just like to have the checks and balances the Constitution says we have. A secret court (FISA) is already set up to approve them and has been used extensively in the past. The current administration chose to cut them out of the loop.


RE: About Time.
By Stoene on 2/1/2006 1:32:02 PM , Rating: 3
You tech. guys don't seem to understand the technology. They are not wiretaps. No wires have been spliced or connected too. These are radio (cell) transmissions that anyone with the right equipment can listen too. Plus, you guys should know a little something about data mining. It involves millions (moohaaahaaa) billions of pieces of information. Should the NSA have to go to special court for each fragment? Also, these intercepts are on inter-continent calls, one end is outside of the US. There are many issues too this. Learn more, say less.


RE: About Time.
By AlexWade on 2/1/2006 2:00:32 PM , Rating: 2
Yes. Yes they should have to get a warrant each time.

"Any nation that would give up a little bit of liberty to gain a little bit of security will deserve neither and lose both." -- Benjamin Franklin.


RE: About Time.
By smitty3268 on 2/1/2006 2:36:10 PM , Rating: 2
This isn't about data mining, it's about tapping someones phone. And no, they don't directly tap a "wire", but they do tap the computers that route the calls to where they are supposed to be. So quit trying to play semantic games.

Yes, they should get a warrant anytime they're trying to invade someones privacy. Otherwise I can only assume they didn't have enough evidence to get one.


RE: About Time.
By Decaydence on 2/1/2006 3:01:46 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You tech. guys don't seem to understand the technology. They are not wiretaps. No wires have been spliced or connected too. ... There are many issues too this. Learn more, say less.


There are way too many problems with facts, grammar, spelling, logic, and tact to point out each, so I will simply ask you to follow the advice you gave in your final comment.

This post does, however, point out the distinct possibility that virtually nothing will come of this matter. The majority of the population, like the poster above, is far too lacking to be able to wrap their minds around this very basic issue.

p.s. There is a difference between too and to. I'm guessing someone with a firm grasp on the "technology" would most likely have a firm grasp on second grade level English. Don't take this as nitpicking in the absence of rebuttal; your post rebuts itself.


RE: About Time.
By Stoene on 2/2/2006 11:32:10 AM , Rating: 2
Decadence,
I'm sure you make a great secretary for whomever you work for with your advanced 2nd grade+ education. However, your counter-argument in this debate hasn't helped me understand how or why my position may be wrong. I heard this on NPR the other day, very interesting http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story...
it covers this topic.


What's next?
By Samus on 2/1/2006 4:06:47 AM , Rating: 2
What's next, AOL is ganna be required to submit AIM logs of its users?




RE: What's next?
By kattanna on 2/1/2006 1:30:25 PM , Rating: 2
who says they arent already..but we just dont know about it?



What Else Is New?
By FoxFour on 2/1/2006 5:02:41 PM , Rating: 2
Until the FBI breaks down my door in the middle of dinner to arrest me for saying "President" and "bomb" in the same sentence in a phone call, I really don't care what the NSA hears. Warrants tend to hard to obtain without overwhelming evidence of wrong-doing, and by the time there is overwhelming evidence, a phone tap is typically redundant. If the NSA puts the crimp on one major crime or one terrorist activity using illegal phone taps, then it's worth it.

It's not like the NSA is going to "borrow" your credit card and buy $10000 worth of stereo equipment on it, or tell your wife that you might be having an affair...





RE: What Else Is New?
By farbdogg on 5/27/2006 11:37:41 PM , Rating: 2
The NSA doesn't, but the FBI does. The FBI made threats to my girl friends's dad for not disclosing private information about one of his clients he defended in court. Threats like deporting his illegal immigrant wife (before they got married), jailtime for treason, and excessive phone taps and other methods of surveillance.

We don't mind government agencies wire tapping looking for possible future terrorists, but we do mind these agencies that abuse thier power.


no biggie
By WileCoyote on 2/1/2006 3:58:10 PM , Rating: 2
I loathe the Bush administration but for some reason I don't mind the wire-tapping issue. It's all their other policies that I have a problem with.




"We basically took a look at this situation and said, this is bullshit." -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng's take on patent troll Soverain









botimage
Copyright 2013 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki