Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I think this ruling, and others it foreshadows, points to a need to amend the Constitution to ensure protections for personal property held by third parties on behalf of private citizens. At the time the 4th amendment was created, it was reasonable to assume that anything a person wanted to keep private would be safely secured by them in their own home. Times have changed. Now I keep my private financial "papers" in a system administered by a third party bank, my private medical "papers" in a system administered by a third party insurance company, and a lot of my other private effects in databases administered by third parties google, dropbox, etc.

Luckily the Framers foresaw that future changes would necessitate changes to our fundamental law so there is a process for the People to make such issues much less open to broad interpretation by the judicial branch.



In legal philosophy there is the notion of "proximate cause" — this needs to be re-purposed for "effects" such that we define the notion of "proximate effects" w/r/t to content producers.

If a music artist has some legal clout regarding that which is produced, and can seek renumeration through certain provisions, we as content producers of phone companies (and obviously ISPs, because clearly that's the next phase in this legal narrative) should have provisions which scope and define joint ownership of our recorded activities insofar as a "chain of events" is scoped around our assigned IP addresses and telephone numbers.

A schema can follow http://schema.org/Person. Block any transaction between third-parties and government that involves these properties. Metadata becomes what is left over — raw information about what is essential to describe the service itself.

We are content producers just like music artists are content producers. Phone companies are just like record labels.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: