
“It’s worth stepping back to think through the logic embraced by Los Angeles, the LAPD, a district court, a Ninth Circuit dissent, and now, four dissenting Supreme Court justices. All seem comfortable with something that wasn’t addressed directly: the notion that hotel and motel guests have no right to privacy in information that they voluntarily turn over to third parties, per Smith v. Maryland. The third-party information precedent is problematic on its own. But it is devastating to privacy when paired with laws that compel businesses to collect detailed information on customers and to turn it over to police without warrants, destroying the ability to enter voluntary transactions that include discretion.”
Related posts:
Hillary Clinton backs Obama on Syria strike
Poland bans genetically modified maize and potatoes
When 'Smart Homes' Get Hacked: I Haunted A Complete Stranger's House Via The Internet
Invasive starfish species threatens Philippines coral reef
Japan to adopt 'bail-ins,' force bank losses on investors if needed, Nikkei says
Americans Renouncing Citizenship Up 221% In 2013
Kenya’s new cellphone money model could disrupt global banking industry
Perseus, Atlas Launch Global High-Frequency Bitcoin Trading Platform
America's Baby Bust
Teacher tells police of pupil 'enchanted by anarchism', tips off his university
Swiss court orders stolen East German millions returned
Al-Qaeda ‘targeting European rail network’: report
Owner of kite-surfing island for Silicon Valley executives faces $4.6 million fine
Saudi Arabia posts $98B deficit amid slumping oil prices
U.S. Probes Treasuries Niche That Investors Claim Is Rigged by Big Banks