Morning Wrap: Pocket-Dials and Privacy | Jim Obergefell's Book Deal | Game Over for Barry Bonds Case
Jim Obergefell, the plaintiff in the Supreme Court's landmark gay-marriage case, has a book deal. A federal appeals court says you have no privacy expectation if someone overhears your pocket-dialed call (but the person you're speaking with might). And the feds walk away from the Barry Bonds obstruction case. This is a news roundup from ALM and other publications.
July 22, 2015 at 03:03 AM
4 minute read
Booked: James Obergefell, the lead plaintiff in the U.S. Supreme Court gay-marriage case, has a book deal, the Los Angeles Times reports. The book, tentatively titled “21 Years to Midnight: The Promise That Brought Marriage Equality,” will be set for release in June 2016, around the time of the one-year anniversary of the court's landmark ruling. The book will tell his story, along with the larger narrative of the same-sex marriage decision and what it means for America.
No pocket privacy: Cell phone users who make accidental pocket dials do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in those conversations exposed to the person on the other end of the line, a federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday. “The court compared the inadvertent dialing of a cell phone—commonly known as pocket- or butt-dialing—to a homeowner who fails to cover his or her windows to block the view of passersby,” Zoe Tillman reports. Judge Danny Boggs of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit wrote that a person who knowingly operates a cell phone and fails to take precautions to prevent pocket dials “does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy with respect to statements that are exposed to an outsider by the inadvertent operation of that device.” The Cincinnati Enquirer has more here on the case.
Attention butt-dialers: 6th Circuit says no reasonable expectation of privacy if person who gets the call listens in http://t.co/SPMYvi8rqD
— Zoe Tillman (@ZoeTillman) July 21, 2015
Facebook flap: In another privacy case, a New York state appeals court has ruled Facebook must hand over users' information to prosecutors. Facebook cannot challenge search warrants New York prosecutors used to get information from its site on hundreds of users suspected of Social Security fraud,” the state appeals court said, “in a decision likely making it harder for New Yorkers to keep their digital lives private,” Reuters reports. The warrants, which applied to 381 users' photos, private messages and other information, could only be challenged by individuals after prosecutors gathered evidence, the First Judicial Department Supreme Court of New York ruled. Google and Microsoft backed Facebook, arguing that the case could set a bad precedent and give prosecutors too much access to digital information.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
Trending Stories
- 1Wine, Dine and Grind (Through the Weekend): Summer Associates Thirst For Experience in 'Real Matters'
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: For Big Law Names, Shorter is Sweeter
- 3The 'Biden Effect' on Senior Attorneys: Should I Stay or Should I Go?
- 4BD Settles Thousands of Bard Hernia Mesh Lawsuits
- 5'You Are Not Alone': 120 Sex Assault Victims Plan to Sue Sean 'Diddy' Combs
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250