Reasonable Expectations of Privacy Settings: Social Media and the Stored Communications Act

Christopher J. Borchert, Fernando M. Pinguelo, D. Thaw
{"title":"Reasonable Expectations of Privacy Settings: Social Media and the Stored Communications Act","authors":"Christopher J. Borchert, Fernando M. Pinguelo, D. Thaw","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2306839","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 1986, Congress passed the Stored Communications Act (“SCA”) to provide additional protections for individuals’ private communications content held in electronic storage by third parties. Acting out of direct concern for the implications of the Third-Party Records Doctrine — a judicially created doctrine that generally eliminates Fourth Amendment protections for information entrusted to third parties — Congress sought to tailor the SCA to electronic communications sent via and stored by third parties. Yet, because Congress crafted the SCA with language specific to the technology of 1986, courts today have struggled to apply the SCA consistently with regard to similar private content sent using different technologies. This Article argues that Congress should revisit the SCA and adopt a single, technology-neutral standard of protection for private communications content held by third-party service providers. Furthermore, it suggests that Congress specifically intended to limit the scope of the Third-Party Records Doctrine by creating greater protections via the SCA, and thus courts interpreting existing law should afford protection to new technologies such as social media communications consistent with that intent based on individuals’ expressed privacy preferences.","PeriodicalId":87176,"journal":{"name":"Duke law and technology review","volume":"44 1","pages":"36-65"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Duke law and technology review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2306839","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 1986, Congress passed the Stored Communications Act (“SCA”) to provide additional protections for individuals’ private communications content held in electronic storage by third parties. Acting out of direct concern for the implications of the Third-Party Records Doctrine — a judicially created doctrine that generally eliminates Fourth Amendment protections for information entrusted to third parties — Congress sought to tailor the SCA to electronic communications sent via and stored by third parties. Yet, because Congress crafted the SCA with language specific to the technology of 1986, courts today have struggled to apply the SCA consistently with regard to similar private content sent using different technologies. This Article argues that Congress should revisit the SCA and adopt a single, technology-neutral standard of protection for private communications content held by third-party service providers. Furthermore, it suggests that Congress specifically intended to limit the scope of the Third-Party Records Doctrine by creating greater protections via the SCA, and thus courts interpreting existing law should afford protection to new technologies such as social media communications consistent with that intent based on individuals’ expressed privacy preferences.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
隐私设置的合理期望:社交媒体和存储通信法案
1986年,国会通过了《存储通信法案》(SCA),为第三方电子存储的个人私人通信内容提供了额外的保护。出于对第三方记录原则的直接关注——这是一种司法创造的原则,通常会消除第四修正案对委托给第三方的信息的保护——国会试图调整SCA,使其适用于通过第三方发送和存储的电子通信。然而,由于国会用特定于1986年技术的语言制定了SCA,因此今天的法院一直在努力将SCA一致地应用于使用不同技术发送的类似私人内容。本文认为,国会应该重新审视SCA,并对第三方服务提供商持有的私人通信内容采用单一的、技术中立的保护标准。此外,它还表明,国会特别打算通过《隐私法》创造更大的保护来限制《第三方记录原则》的范围,因此,法院在解释现有法律时,应根据个人表达的隐私偏好,为符合这一意图的新技术(如社交媒体通信)提供保护。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Political Economy of Utopia Hacking the Internet of Things: Vulnerabilities, Dangers, and Legal Responses Slave to the Algorithm? Why a 'Right to an Explanation' Is Probably Not the Remedy You Are Looking For Legal Nature of Emails: A Comparative Perspective Reasonable Expectations of Privacy Settings: Social Media and the Stored Communications Act
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1