On January 23, 2012 – Supreme Court ruled agreeing that admission of the evidence obtained by warrantless use of the GPS tracking device violated the Fourth Amendment, reasoning that under a privacy expectation rationale that the Forth Amendment protects “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” For full decision, go to: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-1259.pdf Do you agree with this decision?
Do you feel you have a right to privacy of your Facebook page posts, photographs, and other items on your “private” pages? On January 18, 2012, the United States District Court (E.D. MICH. S.D.) ruled, in an injury claim, that “If the Plaintiff’s public Facebook page contained pictures of her playing golf or riding horseback, Defendant might have a stronger argument for delving into the nonpublic section of her account. But based on what has been provided to this Court, Defendant has not made a sufficient predicate showing that the material it seeks is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Although defendant specified the type of evidence sought [access to plaintiff’s Facebook account], it failed to establish a factual predicate with respect to the relevancy of the evidence.”. Moreover, the request for the entire account, which may well contain voluminous personal material having nothing to do with this case, is overly broad. “District courts have discretion to limit the scope of discovery where the information sought is overly broad or would prove unduly burdensome to produce.” Defendant’s request for Plaintiff to sign authorizations to access her Facebook account is DENIED