Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [infoguys-list] More Email Interception Arguments....

Expand Messages
  • Lists
    just goes to show you that there needs to be a serious reworking of Title 18 USC Sec 2511 to clearly define storage and intercept as it pertains to
    Message 1 of 52 , Aug 6, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      just goes to show you that there needs to be a serious reworking of Title 18
      USC Sec 2511 to clearly define storage and intercept as it pertains to
      emails/electronic communications. I don't think the person that wrote the
      original law got any form of consultation with some geeks like us that
      understand the intent of the law and the technical side as well.
      Brian

      _____

      From: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto:infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com]
      On Behalf Of Jim Parker
      Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 5:37 PM
      To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: RE: [infoguys-list] More Email Interception Arguments....



      Seems to me it's just a case of yet another cooky California Judge -
      completely out of touch with reality - playing legal analyst rather than
      doing what he's paid for - judging a case on the merits and evidence
      presented, based on the intended application of the law.

      The legal intent of the Wiretap Act is, and has always been, to protect the
      confidentiality and privacy of your communications. Simply put, the authors
      of the law wanted to ensure that people could say and write whatever they
      wanted to each other privately, without fear of government or outside
      snooping.

      I fail to see why these twits in California find that such a complicated
      concept, and seem to go out of their way to twist and contort the law into
      something that only vaguely resembles the actual written law in order to
      find ways for people to violate it without consequence.

      Then again, it has been suggested in the past that these sorts of decisions
      *might* have something to do with the fact that they ultimately give
      government more power and freedom to invade people's privacy without penalty
      or liability. I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, but you have to admit
      this kind of nonsense is awfully convenient for them.

      That being said, if the e-mails were really in "storage" as this Judge seems
      to believe, why are prosecutors not going after the hacker for unlawful
      access to stored communications, illegal access to a secure computer system,
      using a computer to commit a crime and any number of other related charges,
      and going after the MPAA for conspiracy?

      Jim

      -----Original Message-----
      From: infoguys-list@ <mailto:infoguys-list%40yahoogroups.com>
      yahoogroups.com [mailto:infoguys-list@
      <mailto:infoguys-list%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com]
      On Behalf Of Ricky Gurley
      Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 5:32 PM
      To: infoguys-list@ <mailto:infoguys-list%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [infoguys-list] More Email Interception Arguments....

      Group,

      The same old arguments on email interceptions, seems like some people
      (a few Judges at least, think as I do): http://tinyurl.
      <http://tinyurl.com/6dtg5y> com/6dtg5y
      <http://tinyurl. <http://tinyurl.com/6dtg5y> com/6dtg5y>

      Rick.

      http://rmriinc. <http://rmriinc.bestcyberinvestigator.com>
      bestcyberinvestigator.com
      <http://rmriinc. <http://rmriinc.bestcyberinvestigator.com>
      bestcyberinvestigator.com>

      No virus found in this incoming message.
      Checked by AVG - http://www.avg. <http://www.avg.com> com
      Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.12/1596 - Release Date: 8/6/2008
      4:55 PM






      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • suesarkis@aol.com
      In a message dated 8/8/2008 2:43:43 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, rmriinc@grouply.com writes: Excellent! In the meantime see if you and the experts can
      Message 52 of 52 , Aug 8, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        In a message dated 8/8/2008 2:43:43 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
        rmriinc@... writes:

        Excellent! In the meantime see if you and the "experts" can reverse
        the denial of the motion for summary judgment sought by Valence
        Media....... LOL.



        Rick -

        In the very beginning I said that she found for the good guys against the
        thieves although the good guys did a no-no. However, I also stated something
        to the effect that with bad guys operating out of foreign countries and the
        like, American businesses do not stand a chance anymore if they are forced to
        abide by the laws since the bad guys don't.

        In this case Discovery was ordered. The defense said certain records didn't
        exist and that they provided everything they were ordered to do. They did
        NOT. The plaintiffs then went out and got the ordered docs themselves. They
        did exist and the court reviewed them.

        Now, had she not ruled as she did, the unlawfully obtained docs would have
        been quashed and she would not have been able to grant a 110+ MIL judgment
        along with a permanent INJUNCTION. The money is a moot issue since all defs have
        filed BK but the INJUNCTION is what they really needed. The piracy was
        costing American companies a small fortune to the detriment of the American
        economy and the good guys inuring to the benefit of the pirates.

        As I said to Branscum many years ago, sometimes the ends does justify the
        means.

        By the way, if anyone wants to review the entire case excluding only the
        "chamber sessions" they can do so at -
        _http://news.justia.com/cases/featured/california/cacdce/2:2006cv01093/182718/_
        (http://news.justia.com/cases/featured/california/cacdce/2:2006cv01093/182718/)


        Sincerely yours,
        Sue
        ________________________
        Sue Sarkis
        Sarkis Detective Agency

        (est. 1976)
        PI 6564
        _www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/)

        1346 Ethel Street
        Glendale, CA 91207-1826
        818-242-2505
        818-246-3001 FAX

        "one Nation under God"

        If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English, thank
        a military veteran



        **************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
        Read reviews on AOL Autos.
        (http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.