Previous Politech messages on trash privacy: http://www.politechbot.com/2005/08/08/local-paper-digs/ http://www.politechbot.com/2005/08/05/jonaathan-weinberg-on/ http://www.politechbot.com/2005/08/05/montana-supreme-court/ -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: right to privacy in your trash - money to be made Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2005 17:16:20 -0400 From: scmurley@private To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private> References: <42F3CA7C.4060804@private> I think someone could come up with a business plan around this: truly private garbage collection. You don't put the trash out at the corner, but contract with the garbage collector to pick up the garbage in your yard, with some sort of contract that the garbage is still yours until properly incinerated, and the collector would dispose of it in a way that guarantees privacy - incineration. I suspect this garbage company could charge a pretty penny. After all, just because people are disposing of something (because it has outlived its usefulness or is taking up too much space) doesn't mean they want it ending up in the hands of others who wish them harm. Bryan Murley -------- Original Message -------- Subject: REMOVEEMAIL Re: [Politech] Montana Supreme Court justice warns Orwell's 1984 has arrived [priv] Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2005 22:49:11 -0500 From: Jeff Bachtel To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private> References: <42F3BC02.6090602@private> On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 12:20:34PM -0700, Declan McCullagh wrote: > > > http://news.com.com/2061-10796_3-5820618.html > > Montana Supreme Court justice warns Orwell's 1984 has arrived > August 5, 2005 12:13 PM PDT > > Believe it or not, it's perfectly legal for police to rummage through > your garbage for incriminating stuff on you -- even if they don't have a > warrant or court approval. Declan, I admit to some curiousity at Nelson's histrionics. Warrantless trash diving by police was affirmed by SCOTUS in California vs Greenwood in 1988 (http://www.fightidentitytheft.com/shred_supreme_court.html) . But far beyond that, I'm confused at Nelson's reference to George Orwell's _1984_. Is it absolutely necessary for anyone with privacy concerns to mention this book? Perhaps Nelson isn't aware of this, but most of his stated examples are those of corporations, not the government, invading his privacy; and almost always the choice to avoid this invasion lies with him. I submit that when we live in a country with unrestricted, encrypted communications among its citizens, in a country where websites like http://www.thememoryhole.org/ and http://www.archive.org/ are freely allowed to exist, that Orwell's warning of the immutability of the past is somewhat faint. When we live in a country that permits one to be a bum or a technical luddite, where it is permitted to live an entire life without photographic identification and live in places no surveillance camera could record you, that George Orwell's warnings on the prevalence and abuse of surveillance by a government are also somewhat less than pressing. It might not be impossible for Orwell's dystopian vision to ever come true, but as far as I can see it would require moving backwards in time 20 years, technologically... and I somehow don't see our new corporate masters allowing that to happen. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Politech] Montana Supreme Court justice warns Orwell's 1984 has arrived [priv] Date: Sun, 07 Aug 2005 00:58:31 +0200 From: Ivo Vegter <ivo@private> To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private> References: <42F3BC02.6090602@private> Declan McCullagh wrote: > What's remarkable is the concurring opinion of Montana Supreme Court > Justice James C. Nelson, who reluctantly went along with his colleagues > but warned that George Orwell's 1984 had arrived. Apropos: 1984 posited not only a world in which the minutiae of personal and private life were accessible to anyone with suitable interest and technology - i.e. the government of Oceania. That indeed is a world in which we live today, and I cannot disagree with Justice Nelson's view on this count. But 1984 also posited that in this world, there was no democracy, no public oversight of government affairs, no rule of law administered by an independent judiciary, no free press, and no constitutional rights of individual liberty for Winston Smith. As much as I often sympathise with the libertarian point of view, and as much as the term libertarian (or at least "classically liberal") describes my own views, the mere fact that data is gathered and retained does not infringe on this liberty. Abuse of this data can infringe on liberty. And since such data can be abused, it should ideally not be gathered or retained in the first place. But that is an ideal. It is not practically feasible to ensure this. There are in fact many instances in which there are legitimate reasons for gathering and retaining private data, and in which such practices actually benefit the subject. This we cannot change. But failing the latter, what is important is to insist on adequate measures to prevent its abuse. So allow me to dissent with the learned judge's concurring opinion. -- Ivo Vegter <ivo@private> +27-84-210-2003 Cerberus Editing & Consulting -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Politech] Jonaathan Weinberg on 1984 and right to privacy in your trash Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 18:06:07 -0400 From: dan@private To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private> CC: politech@private, dan@private Declan McCullagh writes: | | Justice White, writing for the | majority, wrote that the determinative question was whether people had a | "reasonable expectation of privacy" in the garbage they put out, and | continued: | It would be fun if useless to poll the Politech readership about how many of us, knowing the above, have ever since endeavored to put our trash out as close as feasible to when it is picked up... Best, --dan -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Politech] Jonaathan Weinberg on 1984 and right to privacy in your trash Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 20:27:57 -0400 From: Thomas Leavitt <thomas@private> Organization: Godmoma's Forge, LLC To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private> References: <42F3CA7C.4060804@private> So, does this suggest that taking measures to prevent having your garbage rifled through (ensuring that it isn't "abandoned") might be a counter-argument in a similar case? I.e., shred your papers. Compact your trash. Put locks on your dumpster. Keep it on private property at all times. Post no trespassing signs on the property. Post "no dumpster diving" signs on the dumpster and elsewhere. Hire a private disposal service, and have them contractually obligated to not permit access to your garbage, and to deliver it straight to an incinerator or a recycling depot. If the general public can't be expected to get to it, the police shouldn't be expected to get to it without a warrant. I'm sure that Intel, etc. and various other companies and government agencies have "secure" trash disposal services. Thomas -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Politech] Montana Supreme Court justice warns Orwell's 1984 has arrived [priv] Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2005 21:10:49 -0400 From: David M. Brown <dmb1000@private> To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private> References: <42F3BC02.6090602@private> Don't understand this opinion. "We're the last bulwark etc...this is horrible...I...concur"? You'd think someone were holding a gun to his head. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Politech] Montana Supreme Court justice warns Orwell's 1984 has arrived [priv] Date: Sat, 06 Aug 2005 17:15:04 +1200 From: Steve Withers <swithers@private> To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private> References: <42F3BC02.6090602@private> On Sat, 2005-08-06 at 07:20, Declan McCullagh wrote: > Pelvit's attorney argued that his client had a reasonable expectation of > privacy in his trash, but the court rejected the argument and said the > trash was, well, meant to be thrown away. > > What's remarkable is the concurring opinion of Montana Supreme Court > Justice James C. Nelson, who reluctantly went along with his colleagues > but warned that George Orwell's 1984 had arrived. We reproduce his > concurring opinion in full: > > -Declan So the clever crim will put his illicit waste in OTHER people's trach cans. They'll do the time while he'll do the crime. Steve _______________________________________________ Politech mailing list Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Mon Aug 08 2005 - 19:14:51 PDT