On Mon, 2005-03-14 at 18:20 +0000, Tim Bedding wrote: > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4348425.stm > > It looks like EFF may be on the wrong side of the argument > here. > > Free speech is about freedom, not access. > > > If I say that Microsoft is a bad company and did X, Y or Z, > then that is free speech. > > If I reveal trade secrets about Microsoft, then that is > something else. > > Any dissenters?
Sort of. "Mr Opsahl said the EFF was planning to appeal against the ruling because the bloggers were journalists and US federal laws stop net firms handing over copies of e-mail messages if the owner of that account does not give their consent." The EFF's concern here is whether bloggers are journalists. The libertarian concern here is that since "the press" (i.e. journalists) get special privilege, then the government should not be determining who is or is not a journalist - especially based on old methods as opposed to what they do. If a blogger is just using their blog as a personal diary or "journal", they are not a journalist. If they are reporting on events, they are journalists. It could also be said that if they are commenting on events they are also journalists. You analogy is not fitting to the situation. To finish out what happened: > If I say that Microsoft is a bad company and did X, Y or Z, > then that is free speech. > > If I reveal trade secrets about Microsoft, then that is > something else. You send me those trade secrets. I report on them. Microsoft wants *my* email. But they want it from my ISP. That is what happened. As you can see it is not as simple as you intimate. According to the EFF, Federal law says that ISPs are *not* required to divulge the emails if the owner of the account (the blogger) does not consent, if the owner is a journalist. Trade Secret is a tricky yet simple issue. Thing is with Trade secrets, once they are out they have no protection. You only protection is secrecy. If you break your NDA and disclose a trade secret to me, and I write up our encounter on an industry website which tracks developments/goings-on in that industry, you have no recourse against me. I didn't violate the NDA as I am not a party to it. Further as a journalist (in this case) I have a right to confidential sources. Technically, since this is trade secret not copyright/patent, you didn't break the law either. You violated a civil agreement (contract) between you and the company (Apple in this case). As a result, there is no legal requirement in the line of "aiding and abetting a crime" that requires me to reveal my sources. So do I dissent from your opinion of what is right/wrong here? I suppose I do in that I don't believe the government gets to decide who is or is not a journalist especially if based on method. I as a journalist have a right to keep my email records private, and you have no right to go digging through them because someone *else* did something you don't like and I *reported* it or on it. So no, EFF is not on the wrong side here. Apple was essentially granted a fishing expedition. Note they were looking for unknown informants. had they had specific information for specific people, they would have, should have, and could have gone after those suspected informants. And in such a case, I would agree (as would those at the EFF most likely) that a judge can and should allow Apple access to the suspected perpetrator's email account. Remember they are looking at your entire email account - that's what is meant by records. Apple wants to go digging in these blogger-journalists email for something they might think could point at who broke the NDA, assuming this was actually done. This will give them access to a lot more email than is appropriate for this case. At best, they should only have access to email deemed by a third party to be relevant to the case. Instead they are apparently getting carte blanche -pending the appeal. Cheers, Bill P.S. I do work with the EFF on a few things, but not this one. P.P.S. Also make me glad I handle all my email and not a service provider. Nobody else has my "email records". _______________________________________________ Libnw mailing list Libnw@immosys.com List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
