11–20 of 57 posts
Note that this opinion rests almost entirely on the fact that Lavabit/Levinson failed to raise any of his legal arguments before the trial court. Any lawyer can tell you that, if you want a court of appeals to consider a legal issue, you have to raise it before the lower court first to give them a chance to rule and to develop a record for the court of appeals to review. I'm sure there are those out there who will wa…
The more I read about the case, the less happy I am about having donated to Levison. Pages 8-12 of this decision convey a narrative about Levison's handling of the FBI requests. In particular, they detail an escalation that Levison himself provoked: * The DOJ reached out demanding metadata regarding (presumably, and let's just stipulate) Snowden's use of Lavabit. * Levison rejected the request, on the auspices that S…
I'm unhappy that Levison's overbearance on email caused Pamela Jones to quit Groklaw. Ordinarily these are exactly the kinds of cases PJ would be able to demonstrate some of her expertise on, by explaining how longstanding legal principles apply to problems in the tech sector. She was never a coder though, and so her expertise on tech was limited to what was explained to her. I don't think Levison was making his clai…
The more I read about the case, the less happy I am about having donated to Levison. Pages 8-12 of this decision convey a narrative about Levison's handling of the FBI requests. In particular, they detail an escalation that Levison himself provoked: * The DOJ reached out demanding metadata regarding (presumably, and let's just stipulate) Snowden's use of Lavabit. * Levison rejected the request, on the auspices that S…
I'm unhappy that Levison's overbearance on email caused Pamela Jones to quit Groklaw. Ordinarily these are exactly the kinds of cases PJ would be able to demonstrate some of her expertise on, by explaining how longstanding legal principles apply to problems in the tech sector. She was never a coder though, and so her expertise on tech was limited to what was explained to her. I don't think Levison was making his clai…
Can you explain?
I may be wrong, but my misunderstanding is that Groklaw shut down because there is no way of knowing whether or not the privacy has been compromised.
In other words, this incident revealed information that was already true; Groklaw shut down in the light of the new knowledge, but not because the previously-private communication was suddenly vulnerable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Would Google just hand over the key to all of their Gmail users? No, Google would comply with the narrow, specific warrant the first time. Again, it bears repeating that the only reason DoJ asked for the master key in the first place is because Levison refused to comply with the narrow requests. If Levison wouldn't do it, then the government would figure it out on their own, but the only reason this situation even…
Wasn't it his right to fight a court order (don't think it was warrant) like that? I think Twitter has fought court orders in the past, while refusing to give the data in the mean time. I think Levison's mistake was that he did it all by himself, instead of hiring a lawyer and following the proper procedure for doing that. The government escalated with a broader request, which I guess was also their right to try (eve…
Note that this opinion rests almost entirely on the fact that Lavabit/Levinson failed to raise any of his legal arguments before the trial court. Any lawyer can tell you that, if you want a court of appeals to consider a legal issue, you have to raise it before the lower court first to give them a chance to rule and to develop a record for the court of appeals to review. I'm sure there are those out there who will wa…
Is an unconstitutional act acceptable if a defendant's defense is sub-par?
Note that this opinion rests almost entirely on the fact that Lavabit/Levinson failed to raise any of his legal arguments before the trial court. Any lawyer can tell you that, if you want a court of appeals to consider a legal issue, you have to raise it before the lower court first to give them a chance to rule and to develop a record for the court of appeals to review. I'm sure there are those out there who will wa…
Is an unconstitutional act acceptable if a defendant's defense is sub-par?
In considering this, remember that the record might sometimes be deficient in ways that the court of appeals cannot identify on its own. And it seems likely that inadequate development will cause courts of appeals to things wrong as often as it permits them to get things right despite the procedural "technicality."
Note that this opinion rests almost entirely on the fact that Lavabit/Levinson failed to raise any of his legal arguments before the trial court. Any lawyer can tell you that, if you want a court of appeals to consider a legal issue, you have to raise it before the lower court first to give them a chance to rule and to develop a record for the court of appeals to review. I'm sure there are those out there who will wa…
Is an unconstitutional act acceptable if a defendant's defense is sub-par?
(And vice versa, of course.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm unhappy that Levison's overbearance on email caused Pamela Jones to quit Groklaw. Ordinarily these are exactly the kinds of cases PJ would be able to demonstrate some of her expertise on, by explaining how longstanding legal principles apply to problems in the tech sector. She was never a coder though, and so her expertise on tech was limited to what was explained to her. I don't think Levison was making his clai…
> I'm unhappy that Levison's overbearance on email caused Pamela Jones to quit Groklaw. Can you explain? I may be wrong, but my misunderstanding is that Groklaw shut down because there is no way of knowing whether or not the privacy has been compromised. In other words, this incident revealed information that was already true; Groklaw shut down in the light of the new knowledge , but not because the previously-privat…
And that was true since POP3 was invented. When you're sending the digital equivalent of postcards to each other then you can never know if your privacy has been compromised.
It's unclear to me what PJ really thought about the privacy of email before Levison, but what is clear is that Levison and SilentCircle's hysterical actions are what convinced PJ to close up shop.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is an unconstitutional act acceptable if a defendant's defense is sub-par?
[deleted]
Remember that by the time a case reaches a court of appeals, with the government as a party, the U.S. itself must first decide its position is meritorious (it almost always has discretion to bring or defend a case). Then a district court also rules on it. So, for the district court to be reversed against the government, both the government lawyers and the district court must have been incorrect. This will not be an especially common occurrence even without the improper influence that you are insinuating. Given this posture, I find it remarkable, frankly, that the government loses appeals as frequently as it does. While it usually wins, it is hardly rare for them to lose.