Did the Washington Post Violate the Electronic Communications Privacy Act? (MD4Bush)

NRO ^ | 11/10/05 | Stephen Spruiell

[Grampa Dave]

Thanks for the documentation and references.

So who will be the Compost's Mary Mapes, and who will be their Danny Blather?

[beckett]

I said basically the same thing the other day.

[Anti-Bubba182]

Really nothing happens on the WP end until charges are pressed. You can count on the WP to stonewall until that time comes.

[Grampa Dave]

It will be fun to watch them twist and turn in the winds of truth.

[Anti-Bubba182]

ping

Borrowed conservative in nyc's ping list with his prior permission.

[Anti-Bubba182]

Their attorneys should be looking at the law right about now.

[Kay]

From your lips to God's ears.

[aculeus]

The WaPo is in trouble with FR?

Poetic justice is afoot.

[Gabz]

This is just so absolutely delicious :)

[Grampa Dave]

"Their attorneys should be looking at the law right about now."

I'm sure the Compost's attorney's are monitoring all threads dealing with MD4BUSH.

If they weren't aware of that law, they are now after you posted it! :)

[LurkedLongEnough]

This is a WaPo op pop! Interesting to see what happens.

[Anti-Bubba182]

Yes it is! It is especially nice after all the puffery about GOP dirty tricks earlier in the year.

[Anti-Bubba182]

All they can do is wait and see if the hammer drops on them. It will get very interesting if that happens.

[LowOiL]

Really nothing happens on the WP end until charges are pressed. You can count on the WP to stonewall until that time comes.

A court ordered revealing of IP info would be sweet once the papers are served. WAPO would definately be pushing for closed door courts on the matter to save face (while leaking just what the want to be heard to friendly press comrades).

[stacytec]

Legs, teeth, and damn ugly!

[Congressman Billybob]

The conclusion of this article is the same as the suggestion I posted as a First Amendment lawyer, on another thread. Everyone who comes on FreeRepublic and signs in to use the Freepmail (and to get posting privileges) reads the Terms of Use. MD4Bush was on notice not to five his information to any "third party."

More importantly, Matthew Mosk, reporter for WashPost was also on warning. He was on warning that MD4Bush COULD NOT grant permission for a third party, namely Mosk, to access that account. So, regardless of the "permission of the intermediary" which the Post claimed to have, they still did not have valid permission to access MD4Bush's account.

I conclude, strongly, that FreeRepublic is within its rights, on the circumstances of this particular situation, ro reveal to the public all information it has about the various times of access on this one particular account -- regardless of whether the person on the keyboard was MD4Bush, Mosk, or anyone else, signing in as MD4Bush.

If there is any blowback from that release, I will be happy to testify in court or in deposition that on the circumstances and facts of this situation, that action is legitimate.

John Armor, Esq.

[Gondring]

If they have clicked, you must convict!

[Anti-Bubba182]

"A court ordered revealing of IP info would be sweet once the papers are served. WAPO would definately be pushing for closed door courts on the matter to save face..."

It would be sweet. The court would have to find out for certain that Mosk was not MD4Bush to act. I don't think WP could get a "Closed door court", but Grand Jurys are like that.

[nopardons]

Thanks for the ping.

[Anti-Bubba182]

Welcome.