I was just watching a show on CourtTV (about 4:15am, Friday Dec 8th, 2005) about piracy online and the MPAA.  The show features students from various areas, learning about piracy and the legalities involved.

 

One student stood up and said her question was for the FBI agent that had spoken earlier.  She asked, “In investigating piracy, is the FBI respecting people’s rights?”  (That quote may be slightly off, but it is correct in basis.)

 

The FBI agent responded in turn, stating that the law gives people the right to pricavy in situations where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy.  The agent continued by saying that because the internet is “open” and “public,” and that your traffic online (including sites visited, files up/downloaded, etc…) can be easily monitored, citizens do not have a right to privacy, online.

 

Excuse me?  I don’t have a right to privacy?  If one takes the agent at his word, then all of my communications online may be monitored at any time, without informing me, because they are not “private.”  This includes e-mail, ANY and ALL web traffic, a log of every site I visit, etc…  Essentially, the agent is stating that the FBI has the authority to monitor every move I make online, and by doing so does not violate my right to privacy.   Excuse me, but the only way they can monitor that is by either attaching directly to my ISP, and tracking each and every IP address I’m dynamically assigned (sometimes as often as every 24 hours, it changes), OR monitoring from my computer, itsself.

 

I can’t believe that an FBI agent would stand there and essentially strip my right to any sort of privacy, online, in the name of fighting piracy.  What’s next?  The government will start scanning all e-mail (there’s no proof that they do this, yet), all instant messages, all chat, all file transfers, all blogs, etc?  Where does it end?  It’s a short step from there to saying that because telephones are on a public network, and people on the street can pick up a payphone and access the telephone networks, that our phone conversations are on public networks, and therefore we do not have a right to privacy in that respect.  It’s an even shorter step to saying that because I watch TV which is sent over the AIR and/or “public” cable systems, I am using a public network, and therefore the government can monitor everything I watch, without violating my right to privacy.  It’s a leap, but still possible, to get to the worst.  Because our homes have windows, anyone can look in, and therefore we are living in a public environment, so anything that can be seen from the windows of our homes is considered public, and therefore we can be monitored in that respect (from the outside, looking in), and so we have no right to privacy, there.  What happens if it’s suddenly deemed illegal to cover our windows, out of respect for the government’s ability to monitor us in the hunt for evil people?

 

Yes, I know I’m going way off base here, and talking about conspiracy theories, and the worst-case scenarios; but if you think about it, things that were worst-case scenarios, a decade or two ago, are reality, today.  Where does this end?!

 

What are your thoughts?

 

(SOURCE: I attempted to find a link to this show’s information page on courttv.com, but was unable to.  The schedule is listed as either “cable in the classroom” or “to be determined” for this time block (depending on the calendar you look at).  The Cable in the Classroom site has a page about some new “protecting intellectual property, online” show they’re starting in January, but that isn’t scheduled to start for another month, and the video clips don’t match what I saw.  If anyone finds a video of this, or a definitive link, please let me know.  For now, visit courttv.com, and try to find it, if you wish.)