RoccoR
Gold Member
alang1216, et al,
A requirement for either a "subpoena" or a "warrant" is --- in itself --- a legal protection.
That's correct. (Just because a federal law enforcement activities has used a subpoena --- does not mean Constitutional Safeguards have not been observed.)
The protection is in the law (Fourth Amendment). Requirement for the judicial review protects your privacy, from unreasonable government intrusion (search and seizure). BUT the Fourth Amendment does permit searches and seizures that are reasonable upon the presentation of "probable cause" (particular circumstances justify the subpoena or warrant).
Protections are not put in place to facilitate the privacy of criminal behaviors or provide a screen to the visibility of illegal activity.
If there is a question on the matter of warrants, subpoenas, and other seizures --- it may be challenged in an Evidentiary Hearing; a step of the judicial process is meant to uphold laws against unlawful and unwarranted search and seizure; where the prosecutor and defense make their case before the judge.
Protections are not meant to shield the criminal from prosecution, but rather to protect ALL citizens privacy in cases where there is no reasonable cause to believe criminal activities were involved.
Most Respectfully,
R
A requirement for either a "subpoena" or a "warrant" is --- in itself --- a legal protection.
(COMMENT)Quite wrong. Data stored in the iCloud in the USA is subject to US subpoenas just like any other document storage system. Apple has the means in place to access any and all data stored there. In fact the FBI has already subpoenaed the data and Apple complied.(COMMENT)
Data Storage on the "cloud" is no more accessible by the FBI (which has very small and very limited surveillance capabilities --- I think you mean NSA) than to anyone else.
The same same legal protections (less what is approved in the terms of service) that cover leased or rented server space --- cover the cloud.
Most Respectfully,
R
That's correct. (Just because a federal law enforcement activities has used a subpoena --- does not mean Constitutional Safeguards have not been observed.)
The protection is in the law (Fourth Amendment). Requirement for the judicial review protects your privacy, from unreasonable government intrusion (search and seizure). BUT the Fourth Amendment does permit searches and seizures that are reasonable upon the presentation of "probable cause" (particular circumstances justify the subpoena or warrant).
Protections are not put in place to facilitate the privacy of criminal behaviors or provide a screen to the visibility of illegal activity.
If there is a question on the matter of warrants, subpoenas, and other seizures --- it may be challenged in an Evidentiary Hearing; a step of the judicial process is meant to uphold laws against unlawful and unwarranted search and seizure; where the prosecutor and defense make their case before the judge.
Protections are not meant to shield the criminal from prosecution, but rather to protect ALL citizens privacy in cases where there is no reasonable cause to believe criminal activities were involved.
Most Respectfully,
R