A Reasonable Expectation of Privacy

Call me strange but I think the test for American privacy is a little perverted. A “reasonable expectation of privacy” is quite vague. Some parts are easy—privacy doesn’t exist in public. Other parts aren’t—information provided to third parties isn’t private even if it is offered in private. What?

Well, what about if I give my social security number to an online tax program to file my taxes? What if I send an iMessage to a fellow iPhone user? What if I’m having a quiet conversation in a Starbucks? What about things I post on Facebook with specific privacy settings? What if I just go online?

Maybe you have reasonable answers for the first few questions, but that last one is peculiar. Unless you have the funds required to be your own ISP (internet service provider) any information you provide or obtain on the internet is funneled through a third party—which is not protected according to the 1970s case that basically paved the way for NSA spying.

But how can that be the test on a network which most would assume is private? And how can that be the test on a network in which there is no way to easily access it without going through a third party? You use the internet on personal devices most of the time. You use your own pipe to funnel information to specific places for specific purposes. But even though you may be on a private device on a private network, according to that ruling, all of those communications have no expectation of privacy. Your cell phone calls have no expectation of privacy because you could reasonably assume that someone can pick up that signal and listen in—unless it’s encrypted perhaps. And land lines can have an expectation of privacy. Or it could be the other way around. It is pretty convoluted and it’s hard to keep straight when I expect privacy on any phone within my home.

I think it’s time we revise what our expectations of privacy are. I think intent of the user and action of the eavesdropper are important. I don’t intend for others to eavesdrop on my cell phone calls, text messages, or any packetized traffic that I don’t use in public or on a public network. Just like the information I provide to my wife, I expect that information is intended for the individual I share it with unless I am providing it in a public forum—and I am definitely expecting that it cannot be used against me. I assume that communication is safe, unless it is easily accessible by someone. No one has to break a law to read my website or stand by me at a pay phone, but someone has to perform an illegal act to packet sniff my network for information or tap my phone. Isn’t that sort of test reasonable enough?