Thus, if the plaintiff wants to sue these 2,094 defendants, it owes this court 2,094 separate filing fees, and it must file individual actions. Plaintiff then would be unable to combine together a single, massive discovery request with which to burden non-party ISPs such as TWC.»
The power of self-interest
Time Warner Cable has not always had the reputation of a white knight when it comes to helping its subscribers—the company famously tried to squeeze more cash from broadband users by applying ridiculous data caps, an issue so sensitive to it eventually drew the wrath of senators and congressmen.
But in this case, with its own self-interest also on the line, TWC has made an argument that strikes not just at a single subpoena but also at the overarching legal strategy behind the US Copyright Group’s work.»
Comentarios desactivados en Single action, multiple defendants and the power of self interest
Recent news have taken lawful interception to (some) media exposure.
That LEA, NSA and other agencies may be using interception and/or spying to gather intelligence is no surprise to no one.
To do so, there has to be many actors intervening, including operating system vendors, network hardware manufacturers, network providers, TTP, etc, who may release proprietary secret knowledge about their systems in order to keep a competitive advantage with the considered «bad guys».
But reading FRE 702 and 703 (and the excellent notes here and here) one wonders in his infinite ignorance, if evidence collected using bleeding edge lawful interception techniques (those that use to be proprietary and secret) ever surfaces in trial, how is it going to stand?
Comentarios desactivados en lawful interception / lawful spying and FRE
I’ve just finished this book (excellent reading, by the way). It encourages you to critically read and comment cases. In order to test the knowledge I acquired in the read (or the lack of it, thereof), I want to evaluate the following case presented as an exercise:
Read the following text, put it into context and raise the legal issues you may find relevant.
On his birthday, Mr. Engineer, employee at a high-tech firm named Pear, goes to a biergarten and leaves behind a prototype cell phone he was working with.
Mr. Finder, also client at the bar, finds the prototype and allegedly tries to contact the firm with the purpose of returning it. Pear employees are not aware of the prototype missing and do not give Mr. Finder proper guidance to return the valuable.
Mr. Finder then contacts Mr. Journalist, editor at an online publication dedicated to gadgetry news. Mr. Finder gives the found prototype to Mr. Journalist in exchange of 5.000USD.
Mr. Journalist publishes details of the device and the name of Mr. Engineer on his online publication.
Days later a search warrant is served at Mr. Journalist’s house when he is not at home and all computers and storage media found are seized.”
Continue reading «Exercise»
Packet Forensics is a firm that provides products and services to enterprises, network operators, law enforcement and defense and intelligence agencies.
It was mostly unknown, but lately it is gaining some focus because of a product of them that may be circumventing SSL.
See Wired (or Gizmodo) and arstechnica for more information. This paper from Christopher Soghoian and Sid Stamm explains the techniques they may be using.
P.S: Do not waste your time searching for the product on their website, it is not listed there.
Comentarios desactivados en Certifying lies
To the extent that the key players can be identified early, forensically imaging their hard drives immediately will demonstrate good faith and potentially avoid second-guessing later in the investigation.»
Karen E. Willenken, counsel specializing in white-collar criminal defense at New York-based Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, makes a good point in this very interesting article.
It is focused on the importance of preserving hard drives in order to provide a strong proof support in the event of a request to produce evidence. At least in case the evidence found on them does not make you appear guilty.
Of course it does not fully apply to our legal system (Spain), but there are also mechanisms here that allow the judge to consider bad faith or to draw adverse inference from evidence (or the lack of it).
Via Forensic Focus.
Comentarios desactivados en Evidence of obstruction
Comentarios desactivados en ACTA vs. EDPS: Fight!