Header
Judges Rule E-mails Are Private
By Allan Holmes | Tuesday, June 19, 2007  |  09:20 AM

A U.S. federal court ruled yesterday that law enforcement agents must obtain a warrant to seize private e-mails, much like warrants must be obtained to listen in on private telephone conversations, according to an Associated Press report.

From the article:

The ruling stems from a fraud investigation against Steven Warshak, owner and president of Berkeley Premium Nutraceuticals, an herbal supplement company known for its "Smiling Bob" ads.

Warshak, whose company markets supplements that include a "natural male enhancement" product called Enzyte, argued that his Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures were violated when the government went after his e-mail records.

The appeals court said the lower court correctly reasoned that e-mails stored at a service provider "were roughly analogous to sealed letters, in which the sender maintains an expectation of privacy. This privacy interest requires that law enforcement officials obtain a warrant, based on a showing of probable cause."

National Public Radio's Morning Edition reported on the ruling, calling it a "very significant case."



Comments


I am wondering what you mean in commenting the case should have no bearing on status of emails in government computers. But it may? Just not used as a precedent yet? Anyone, government or not, should need probable cause to seize ones mail of any kind. It is a federal offense to tamper with a mail box. Why should an electronic mailbox be any different? Why would email on a government computer be any different in respect to privacy than mail in a mailbox protected by federal privacy law. You can't completely control what mail is sent to you via email.

JACKSON  | Wednesday, June 20, 2007 |  02:55 PM



Following up on Don's remark, I suspect the same parallel caution applies to employees in the private sector, where the computer resources within the office are company property.

And...  | Wednesday, June 20, 2007 |  07:05 AM



E-mail users should be warned. This case should have absolutely no bearing on the status of e-mails in government computers and e-mail systems. Thusfar, precedence places these e-mails in the realm of federal government property.

Don  | Tuesday, June 19, 2007 |  02:43 PM




Post a comment



ABOUT THIS BLOG


Allan Holmes on what's happening and what's being discussed in the world of federal information technology.

SEARCH THIS BLOG