Verizon Claims Disclosing Customer Records To The NSA Is "Free Speech"
Verizon is currently being sued over allegedly disclosing customer records to the NSA, but are defending themselves by claiming that the disclosure is free speech protected under the first amendment, according to Ars Technica.
"In fact, Verizon basically argues that the entire lawsuit is a giant SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) suit, and that the case is an attempt to deter the company from exercising its First Amendment right to turn over customer calling information to government security services.Verizon's lawyers are the best lawyers ever. Ask Vonage. —MEGHANN MARCOCommunicating facts to the government is protected petitioning activity," says the response, even when the communication of those facts would normally be illegal or would violate a company's owner promises to its customers. Verizon argues that, if the EFF and other groups have concerns about customer call records, the only proper remedy "is to impose restrictions on the government, not on the speaker's right to communicate."
Verizon says phone record disclosure is protected free speech [Ars Technica]
(Photo:stopnlook)
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Nam malesuada commodo erat et molestie. Duis pellentesque aliquam bibendum. Suspendisse venenatis lobortis eleifend. Mauris id est sed lectus convallis aliquam.
Post a comment
Comments:
@d0x: It's not. They're grasping at straws. There are laws that specifically protect records like this -- and Verizon is trying to weasel out of admitting that it broke those laws.
This is not like the decryption key brouhaha (09 etc) -- a number can't be used to harm anyone. Call records, on the other hand, are personal, private information. Besides, you can't copyright simple facts like universal constants (which is what numbers are).
And yet Verizon is trying to use the same argument -- even when the circumstances are entirely different.
Anyone can abrogate his or her write to free speech, and many people do it every day. For example, members of the military agree that they will not speak about certain aspects of their service or certain military activities that are classified. Two parties in a confidentiality agreement promise not to speak about or publish certain information sensitive to one or both parties, but not necessarily illegal to discuss, etc.
Verizon, like any megalomaniacal corporation run by Alberto-Gonzales style lawyers, is just attempting to convince everyone that they can do whatever they want, whenever they want, and you shouldn't try to stop them. Witness the article from earlier today about Verizon trying to rewrite contract law on the fly to avoid having to live up to the terms of their own contracts.
@crawfishpie: http://www.nsa.gov . think cia, but instead of spying on cartel leaders in colombia, they're spying on you. these are the guys that are listening in under the president's domestic surveillance program.
& they even have a page for the kiddies! http://www.nsa.gov/kids/
I'm surprised to hear Verizon's lawyers treat their company as a "citizen" claiming the First Amendment. Does that give Verizon Corp a right to a Social Security # (leading to SS benefits) or AARP benefits?
Whoever this judge is has got to throw out Verizon's pathetic defense in their face.
A corporation is a non-entity which shares similar tax laws with legal residents. That's about as close as it can get to being an American.
companies actually don't have first amendment rights in the exact same way that individuals do.
commercial speech as it is called is regulated much more than "free" speech.
maybe someone at verizon should read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Hudson_Gas_&_Electric...
@pestie: i would tend to agree with that. the problem is that their personhood is the basis for their right to exist & enforce contracts. interestingly enough, i learned at the consitutional center in philly that this right was actually revoked by the supreme court in the 1800s, but a clerk recorded the decision incorrectly.
@IRSistherootofallevil: they do pay income & property taxes - even sales taxes unless they are reselling the items. technically they pay half of your ss taxes, but most economists argue that you are actually paying the full 15%, not the 7.5%/7.5% split (since compensation is generally calculated by total cost of employee, including taxes, benefits, etc.).
@mac-phisto: If that's true, it's a simple problem to deal with. In the same piece of legislation in which we revoke corporate personhood, we also explicitly grant corporations the rights they need to exist in a reasonable, rational form (yeah, I know I'm dreaming).








How is turning over customer information protected by free speech? I didnt give them my information under the assumption that it would be turned over to the Goverment.
They never asked me if it was ok. Im sure if I had some of their personal information they wouldnt like it handed over.
Wouldnt this make identity theft free speech as well? After all its just some letters and numbers.