Intellectual property law
fromBloomberglaw
1 day agoOnline Wiretap Claims to Get Fresh Eye in 1st Cir. Privacy Clash
The First Circuit will clarify the Wiretap Act's applicability to online privacy claims against healthcare and financial sectors.
The Sonoma County Sheriff's Office must comply with subpoenas issued by the county's civilian oversight board as part of a whistleblower investigation into alleged misconduct, a state appeals court ruled Thursday.
This showcases the escalation in behaviors from viewing digital images to filming to physical behaviors. Officers allege Edwards not only possessed and distributed the material but also secretly recorded guests during private moments, leading to additional invasion of privacy charges.
In 1996, the Supreme Court decided Whren v. United States, which came about when plainclothes vice officers patrolling in the District of Columbia passed a truck in a "high drug" area and "their suspicions were aroused." They had a hunch that the truck was involved in a drug operation. They chose to wait until it had violated a traffic ordinance (turning without a signal) and then used that violation as an excuse to stop the truck. In the course of searching the truck, they found crack cocaine.
As you know, Section 215 authorities are not interpreted in the same way that grand jury subpoena authorities are, and we are concerned that when Justice Department officials suggest that the two authorities are 'analogous' they provide the public with a false understanding of how surveillance is interpreted in practice.
While the authority is legally limited to foreign intelligence, it can sweep in Americans' texts, emails and phone calls when they communicate with overseas targets. Those incidental collections - which have sometimes been followed by unauthorized searches of Americans' communications - have been extensively documented by government oversight bodies in recent years. The findings fueled reforms adopted when Congress last renewed the authority in April 2024.