Exercise 3.9
The idea for this exercise came from a real case (though I changed
details). In July 2004,
in a surprising decision, a federal appeals court ruled in favor
of the company. The company was charged under the law against interception
of e-mail. The court ruled that this law
did not apply because the e-mail was stored, not in transit. Stored e-mail
is protected, but by weaker rules. Since e-mail is stored very briefly
at various sites while in transit from sender to receiver, this ruling, if
it had held up, would have
significantly weakened protection for e-mail. In August 2005, the full
appeals court reversed the 2004 decision.
Exercise 3.15
A similarity is that both are means of identifying people who commit
crimes. A significant difference is that a registration requirement
for encryption keys
conflicts with freedom of speech, which has special constitutional
protection.
Exercise 3.16
As a negative right, it could mean that restrictions or interference by
government are not permissible.
As a positive right, it might require subsidies for those
who can't afford encryption software or laws requiring that all e-mail
programs include encryption.
Exercise 3.21
The local prosecutor's office might be another source.
Additional exercises
Exercise
Some privacy advocates suggest that since most people connect to
the Web by telephone lines, the law against wiretapping should
be applied to prohibit businesses from tracking people's activities on the Web.
Discuss this idea. Is this reasonable?
Is a Web site analogous to an outsider
tapping a telephone or analogous to a business we are talking
to on the telephone? What forms of tracking, if any, could
reasonably be interpreted as wiretapping?
Exercise
What legal restrictions, if any, do you think there should be on export
of encryption hardware and software? Give your reasons.
Exercise
What legal restrictions, if any, do you think there should be on sale and use
of encryption hardware and software? Give your reasons.