No, it’s your customer’s privacy
I bet Qwest is glad they didn’t comply.
Verizon stock takes hit on $50 billion lawsuit
A lawsuit is asking a federal court to order President Bush, the National Security Agency and Verizon to end a secret snooping program, and Verizon’s stock took a hit on the news Monday.
Verizon (down $0.36 to $31.43, Research) stock fell more than 1 percent on the New York Stock Exchange early Monday.
The suit, filed Friday by two New Jersey lawyers on behalf of all Verizon subscribers, contends the phone records collection – first reported by USA Today on Thursday – violates the Constitutional right to privacy and federal law.
As a part of the snooping program, the government reportedly collects information every time a call is made on a Verizon phone line.
“The Telecommunications Act of 1934 is as clear as clear can be,” plaintiff Carl Mayer said. “You can’t turn over the records of your customers and if you do so it’s $1,000 per violation. The Constitution is very clear. The Supreme Court has consistently held that the Fourth Amendment prevents unlawful searches and seizures which we believe this to be.”
At $1,000 for each of Verizon’s 50 million customers, the company and government could be made to pay $50 billion dollars in a class action suit, Mayer said.
I don’t think I’d be puting that Verizon stock money into AT&T either.
(Partial repost from a different thread)
It seems that the Bush Administration has been using it’s anti-terrorist phone call logging system to track the calls of reporters at ABC News, in an effort to identify ‘leakers’. If true, this is a MAJOR development which basically destroys any concept of free press in America. There is no more important concept in the free press than the existence of the ‘confidential source’. If the press can not have confidential sources because the sources fear identification, then we have lost a major element of freedom in America.
More details: http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/05/federal_source_.html
>no more important concept in the free press than the existence of the ‘confidential source’.
The most important concept is that you don’t get arrested for what you publish. If a confidential source were a part, then Judith Miller wouldn’t have gone to jail.
It’s a lawsuit. Filed by two lawyers looking to cash in. Anyone can file a lawsuit for any reason.
No ruling exists on either the legality of the data collection OR the cooperation, and in fact current federal law may make it illegal NOT to cooperate.
Bet you a thousand bucks this lawsuit never gets off the ground.
Cool, 1k for my home line and another 2 k for each of my Verizon wireless account.s
Do I have to pay taxes on that money?
Poor Verizon investors. How don’t know how they’ll ever recover from a 1% drop in stock prices.
Clearly this lawsuit is the cause of the stock drop. Obviously they’ll have to pay $1000 for every person whose records they ever handed over to the government.
IF the lawsuit is ever taken seriously and won how much will the clients get? A lousy verizon shirt and one month of free phone service.
The two sleaz… *cough* Lawyers will get the rest.
awesome!
Whether this suit makes it to trial is almost moot. It will make a lot of people notice. And notice they will, just as the mid-term elections are coming around.
I say……bullshit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I believe the pic ou have for the blog is the guy from Verison Wireless. Isn’t Verison a separate public entity from Verison Wireless? Thought it might mislead some readers. But the privacy of people is like Peter Pan. People only wish they had it. Reality which we will not see is rather different and unpleasant.
There’s no constitutional “right” to own an assault rifle with cop killing armour piercing bullets, but… guess Mister Rustic forgets that case law and precendents are as much a part of Constitutional “law” as the basic text.
However, given that the neocons now own the Supremes MR may be, sadly, right (errr..”correct” since the other is self evident.)
“Isn’t Verison a separate public entity from Verison Wireless?”
Not if you go to their website. It is all part of the same thing.
http://www22.verizon.com/
http://www22.verizon.com/wireless/
Just check smith vs maryland 1979. Sorry phone number collecting is not illegal. Maybe it should be but that will take a change in the law.
MelSur
Nice try, but Smith v Maryland was trumped by the 1996 Telecommunications Act, sec. 702.