On Wed, 2009-12-30 at 20:12 -0800, Paul Ferguson wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Keith Medcalf <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Without a warrant, there is an absolute right to privacy. > > It continues to exist right up until either (a) one party chooses > > to give up that privacy or (b) a third party arrives with a Court > > Order. This is simply a covenant between two parties to preserve > > that "private" state unless lawfully compelled by lawful process > > otherwise. In other words, a covenant to adhere to the rule of > > law and the courts in the event of any dispute between the parties > > or any third party. It sure seems like a good thing to me -- and a > > covenant I would hope anyone I do business adheres to. > > > > That's funny. > > You're assuming that the MLAT [1] process works -- it doesn't.
It "worked" against Indymedia UK: http://www.indymedia.org/fbi/ William
