The Ninth Circuit has ruled that Fourth Amendment protections don’t apply when it comes to sharing child porn. Dr Phi notes:

I will note in passing that, while the decision of the 9th Circuit appears to be sound as a matter of law, the opinions seem to misstate the technical facts of the case. All the judges write several times that the NCIS conducted “surveillance of all computers in the entire state of Washington.” If this were true, it would raise obvious 4th Amendment problems, but in actuality Agent Logan searched only those files being shared by a peer-to-peer file sharing program, by which its users presumably forfeit any “reasonable expectation of privacy”. But that should cause its users enough worry, seeing as how most of those files are likely in technical violation of copyright laws, which the government has prosecuted before.

As a legal matter, I’m pretty sure this is right. as a political and business matter, though, going after file sharers has proven to be something of a dead end. Lately, the content-owners have been more interested in teaming up with the ISP’s in order to kick sharers off their accounts. Which is pretty brilliant, because it’s minor enough to not create the sorts of sob stories we’ve seen with people going to prison over this. But it’s severe enough to the culpable parties that it does provide some disincentive.

Not much, though, which is the bind that the content-producers are in. And why they are most likely going to break if they do not bend. (To their credit, they have been bending.)

Category: Server Room

About the Author

2 Responses to Share And Share Alike

  1. Φ says:

    This is a good point. Other than the Pirate Bay case, I haven’t heard much in the way of copyright prosecutions in a while.

    I’m sorry if my post was misleading, but the 9th Circuit did NOT rule that the 4th Amendment doesn’t apply in child porn prosecutions. I assume it does. The 4th Amendment wasn’t implicated in this case at all. My assumption was that if you share something on Gnutella, it’s really hard (i.e. impossible) to argue that you retain a “reasonable expectation of privacy” in what you’re sharing. In fact, I take this to be so obvious that even the defense didn’t argue it, which is why the 9th Circuit didn’t rule on it. But that’s just my layman’s interpretation.

    • trumwill says:

      I think they’d still love to go after the sites that facilitate it, but that’s just playing wackamole. The public ones keep rebounding somewhere else, and the private ones are hard to get to.

      For individuals, it wasn’t popular when they won, and after Hurt Locker the likelihood of victory was in doubt and extorting people for settlements became a dicey affair.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

If you are interested in subscribing to new post notifications,
please enter your email address on this page.