1984 in SFO?

[Ollivier]

I won't loose my time to show you similar events ten years ago, twenty years ago, thirty years ago, et caetera...

To reach a peaceful goal, be afraid is a wall ! If you create a site to explain problems you judge important and grow a petition, it's possible today. In Europa, like in America, petitions aren't forfidden...

Sometimes, some Golgots ignore a petition (They prefer corruption). It's very unfair, but never definitive in a democraty.

[Kaeru Gaman]

a mayority of the citizens in western countries don't care about petitions as long they have enogh beef, beer and TV....
...violence and fear is not the only way to keep the folks quiet...

[Rook Zimbabwe]

over 50% of the citizens in western countries don't care about petitions as long they have enogh beef, beer and TV....
...violence and fear is not the only way to keep the folks quiet...

Nope... not violence... boobs! More boobs on TV less civil unrest!!!

[Kaeru Gaman]

ah.. there is the third "B"

three Bs keep folks quiet: beef, beer and boobs

[the.weavster]

In a proper democracy like Switzerland you get enough signatures on your petition and you get a referendum (and not one of those EU type referendums where you have to do it over and over and over again until you submit and give them the answer they desire).

[the.weavster]

One thing we do have to thank the EU for in England is a goodly amount of boobs (and other bits).

We have the right to hard core porn which used to be denied to us.

[Ollivier]

[Mohawk70]

ah.. there is the third "B"

three Bs keep folks quiet: beef, beer and boobs

Thought it was Booze, Bud & Broads !

[blueznl]

If you're worried about people investigating encrypted materials, have a good look at TrueCrypt and 'plausible deniability'.

[Heathen]

America is a democraty.

Actually, it's a constitutional republic.

[SFSxOI]

A warning came out at work today due to a new law in the US.

On April 21, the Ninth Circuit US Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled that the US Customs Bureau has the right to examine the contents of electronic devices entering the country. The court's view was that Customs do not need probable cause to inspect the contents of electronic devices -- just as they do not need probable cause to inspect the contents of luggage. The ruling from the court states "Reasonable suspicion is not needed for customs officials to search a laptop or other personal electronic storage devices at the border."

"Excuse me, I'd just like to read the email you recieved over the last couple of days! "

Companies are informing people to transver data on the network rather than in laptops and not save data locally unless needed...

Considering how easy this is to circumvent whats the point? It's only privacy invasion and not achieving much for law enforcement

In realation to the U.S.;

Actually, its been this way for about 100 years that they don't need reasonable suspicion to search anything in your posession on entering the country. The only difference here is that they specifically address electronic devices because since electronic devices were never envisioned in the current laws and there were other laws dealing with electronic devices and illegal searches which seemed to conflict. So...they established this one including electronic devices.

Basically this is a 'traffic stop' law, meaning, its the same as if a police officer stops you for a traffic offense (speeding, running a red light, etc...); for a traffic stop the officer really doesn't need reasonable suspicion to search your vehicle during a stop for a traffic violation because technically a traffic stop is a state of arrest because your confined to a specific place for a length of time (setting on the side of the road pulled over by the officer). Most times though to make everything very clear the officer does not search unless there is reasonable suspicion. The reason though the officer can search is because a traffic stop is technically an arrest, and police officers are always allowed to search incident to arrest.

So thats basically what this is, its only that customs made it a big deal with the seemingly conflicting other laws that made contents of electronic devices private which they are in certain situations. The court ruling only seperated out that a certain situation like those in the other laws did not exist here because basically no one made you enter the country and you do so of your own free will; as a result all items including electronic devices are subject to search and seizure.

There is something you don't know about this law/decision though. If they choose, customs can confiscate the electronic device and not give it back...and theres not one thing you can do about it.

[pdwyer]

I think in the past though, being customs, they were looking for weapons, drugs, plants/seeds or contaminants, large somes of money etc.

These are not going to be emails on people hard disks or photo's in their camera.

Looked to me like another case of using the fear of the age to push the boundries of law enforcement another step

[SFSxOI]

I think in the past though, being customs, they were looking for weapons, drugs, plants/seeds or contaminants, large somes of money etc.

These are not going to be emails on people hard disks or photo's in their camera.

Looked to me like another case of using the fear of the age to push the boundries of law enforcement another step

yeah, they looked mostly at those in the past because they were indicators of the concerns then. There is something else driving this also; there is a secret treaty between countries being worked out, can't remember the name right now and not may details have been disclosed, but it deals with piracy of software. Aside from that the biggest push of this change in customs consists of items concerning terrorism (terrorist transported things electronically across borders with lax or non-existant serches of electronic devices in the past), and anti-piracy. In the terrorism aspect I don't see it as a scare tactic because its actually done and has been proven to exist. In the anti-piracy efforts context I do see it as a knee jerk scare tactic put forth by the software companies, because it turns out that none of the numbers put forth by the software companies for piracy are actually real and are not based on any factual evidence.