Immunity for Telecoms or National Security?

Actually the McDonald’s conviction was over turned on the first appeal.  Most real litigation like that where you have to wonder if the Judge took his meds the day he made his decision are over turned rather quickly.

This is just going to cause businesses to STOP following the law until the government attempts to shut them down.  You cannot punish companies for obeying the law and not expect a back lash.

@ncscswitch:

Following the law is an absolute defense in all civil cases.

The fact that the various litigation is proceeding against the telecoms is because the law was NOT followed when the Telecoms bowed to Administration pressure to open their records and/or allow for wiretaps without judicial order.

I don’t think the judges have heard the validation for the cases yet.  I think the President was trying to stop this before it even started.

With all hope, the judges WILL support the Telecoms and REQUIRE those filing these frivolous lawsuits to pay the legal bills of the telecoms to send a message that you cannot sue a company for following the law.

But I suspect the telecoms will get hit very hard financially defending themselves, be found not-guilty in the long run, but the damage will be done and companies throughout the land will cease following laws of this nation and may even move out of the nation to friendlier nations.

It’s better to protect them NOW then to rely on lawyers failing to shop for the right judge and getting one with half a brain left in his head.  IMHO.

And, don’t forget, contractors are legally REQUIRED to inform the government of any suspicious activity they witness under the Patriot Act.  When are all the contractors going to be sued for reporting what they saw in someone’s private home without a warrant?

How ridiculous would you like to get?  (BTW, I’ll remind you that was the PRIMARY reason I was against the Patriot Act from day one.  As a contractor I did not feel comfortable being legally responsible for not reporting what I saw in someone’s home if they did go out and do something illegal.  I was supposed to be there to do my job and leave, not snoop.)

Actually, the telecoms never broke the law.  They may freely give the Government, or anyone else, any information about you they want.  The Privacy Act does not apply.  In fact, as long as they can claim they did not profit from the information they gave the FBI/Homeland Security, they are completely immune.

I reference the case where consumers attempted to sue Jet Blue for giving away their information (including Social Security numbers, addresses, telephone numbers, demographics like number of children, race, etc) to the FBI.  The judge ruled that yes, Jet Blue did give away personal information without permission, however, there was no law forbidding Jet Blue from freely giving away that information.  And, since the Federal Government did not take that information by force (they politely asked for it) they did NOT need a warrant to get the information.

So giving the Telecoms protection for giving away information for free (the same info they probably sell to private companies and individuals btw) is just stopping frivolous lawsuits and stop the waste of federal money through wasted time and expense for a case that cannot be won, due to precedent being set with the Jet Blue Case.

Remember, the Privacy Act does not apply to everything.  Only very specific industries in very specific circumstances with very specific information.  Everything else can be handed out like candy.  Furthermore, no where in the Constitution does it state that citizens have a right to privacy.  It’s implied, but not enforced nor expressly written.  You have a right to protection against illegal search and seizure, but you were not illegally searched, you gave the telecoms this information freely, and it was not seized, the telecoms gave it away.