U.S. Dept Of Justice Wants To Read Your Emails Without Warrants

Not much has changed since the Bush administration, has it?

Google backs Yahoo in privacy fight with DOJ

Google and an alliance of privacy groups have come to Yahoo's aid by helping the Web portal fend off a broad request from the U.S. Department of Justice for e-mail messages, CNET has learned.

In a brief filed Tuesday afternoon, the coalition says a search warrant signed by a judge is necessary before the FBI or other police agencies can read the contents of Yahoo Mail messages--a position that puts those companies directly at odds with the Obama administration.

For its part, the Justice Department has taken a legalistic approach: a 17-page brief it filed last month acknowledges that federal law requires search warrants for messages in "electronic storage" that are less than 181 days old. But, Assistant U.S. Attorney Pegeen Rhyne writes in a government brief, the Yahoo Mail messages don't meet that definition.

"Previously opened e-mail is not in 'electronic storage,'" Rhyne wrote in a motion filed last month. "This court should therefore require Yahoo to comply with the order and produce the specified communications in the targeted accounts." (The Justice Department's position is that what's known as a 2703(d) order--not as privacy-protective as the rules for search warrants--should let police read e-mail.)

"We will preserve and protect the personal privacy and civil liberties that we cherish as Americans."

Who is 'we' specifically? Does that include the jackboots in the Department of Justice, Mr. President?

So this judge effectively declared that "opened mail" is no longer private? Or specifically that mail over "181 days old" is no longer private?

A normal citizen cannot check my e-mail as long as it's over 181 days old. The normal citizen would still need access to my e-mail account, which I have a password on because its contents are private.

How is a private e-mail 'public' for the police (no warrant necessary) just because it's 181 days old?

edit: Oh, looks like that's the law enforcement's position, not the judge's decision at this point.

"Previously opened e-mail" is online storage since it is stored online, what a bull# argument.

[edit on 15-4-2010 by sremmos]

this maybe ashock to you guys -- but they have been reading your emails since there was email... what do you think the Y2K scare was about...?
and what about this animal called Carnovour...?
and how do you suppose they got there hands on all that evidence
they have been using - based on Emails from years ago... how do you
suppose they can recall emails that the sender and receiver have long since deleted...?
lots of questions surround this thing called Privacy... but noting they dont seem to have a problem in this department... but you never know.. I could be wrong...

Originally posted by Anti-Evil
this maybe ashock to you guys -- but they have been reading your emails since there was email... what do you think the Y2K scare was about...?

Bravo!
Anyone who thinks that they haven't already being doing this...well...
...you obviously need to pull your head out of the sand.

Honestly, if you are sending things through email that shouldn't be seen or viewed, that's you first mistake.
You should know better.

If you want privacy, you better communicate in person, underground or underwater, in a bomb shelter, or nuclear submarine in the Arctic circle.

Oh wait, that's where the Bilderberg Group is hiding this year.

Awesome....

Yet another attack on the internet freedoms of individuals by another government/agency

Just wait until ACTA takes hold in the participating countries and then you'll really see internet freedom take a serious hit

Originally posted by Anti-Evil
this maybe ashock to you guys -- but they have been reading your emails since there was email... what do you think the Y2K scare was about...?

When teletype was big it was the same way. It is possible to squeek radio signals around here and there but code is still employed. But contained comm systems? Transatlantic cable? Forget about it. They had teams of people monitoring that deal. Every single key press you have ever made on the net could probably be recalled.

[edit on 15-4-2010 by Logarock]

It amazes me that we accept that the security of our nation depends on 'fishing' expeditions into private information.

Warrant-less (or blanket warrant) searches just tells me, as a layman, that they have NOTHING upon which to base their activities, so they need the ability to "just do it" and forgo oversight which is meant to ensure our "Constitutionally" recognized rights. Unfortunately, expressing any concern over such 'inalienable' rights is now considered suspect......

Used to be that the Justice Department could be relied upon to focused on protecting those rights. Now it's focused on something other than that, but that 'something' is apparently a 'super' secret.

I wish they would apply the same principles of scrutiny to our 'so-called' public servants.

Putting aside the privacy concerns for a moment (I know, it's hard!) What a poor argument by the justice department.

Justice: It's over 181 days old so it's not in electronic storage.

Rational human being: What the heck? Why?

Justice: Because storage can't occur after six months. And that's in the dictionary that I just made up.

Rational human being: That's insane!

Justice: Even if it is insane--doesn't matter. Because you opened it anyway. King's X. Opened e-mail is no longer private. So we win!

Eye roll. Please. I mean is there some insane statute where all this trash comes from or is Justice really just making this crud up on the spot?

Thats bull if the government goes after your life for no reason, they will tell people all your life, no concern what so ever for human rights.

Living in the real world, governments are monsters.

Remember people do not do anything to justify there rubbish.

reply to post by Maxmars



It appears to me that they simply want to use here to fore unusable information to make a case against anyone they would like. That is in conjunction with new definitions of 'sedition" ect. They want to be able to go into court with illegally obtained material and just spin it all over the place, out of context ect. These days just the idea that they had to obtain said info, the effort to gather it, carries with it some dammed presumption of guilt.

Originally posted by Cincinnatus
Putting aside the privacy concerns for a moment (I know, it's hard!) What a poor argument by the justice department.

Eye roll. Please. I mean is there some insane statute where all this trash comes from or is Justice really just making this crud up on the spot?

It seems as if they are simply bent on probing the depths and frontires of human stupidity becouse they have no other way to measure the effects of years of brainwashing and philosophical undermining. So they probe the victim to see how deep they can go before he starts screaming.

And this is precisely why everyone who cares about their privacy should be using at least 2048 bit public key encryption such as PGP or better GnuPG for every email they send. If they want to snoop my emails the only ones readable are the facebook notifications and offers of enlarging and enhancing parts of my body.