From: Ernest Hua <hua@chromatic.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 95 19:02:36 PST
To: "Declan B. McCullagh" <declan+@CMU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Is ths legal?...
In-Reply-To: <skp7EKS00YUvAEUFUm@andrew.cmu.edu>
Message-ID: <9512182021.AA23246@krypton.chromatic.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



>    The answer to the "is this legal?" question is more complex than 
> simply "private versus public" university.  There are fairly strict 
> federal anti-wiretapping laws.  It is hardly clear that a private 
> university may eavesdrop on students' phone or computer conversations, 
> even if conducted over the university's network.  Furthermore, many 
> states have their own anti-wiretap and anti-eavesdrop laws, which are 
> even stricter than federal standards.  I don't have the time nor the 
> inclination to do research into Oklahoma law, but we did some research 
> into this area of state and federal law for the LaMacchia case and 
> concluded that in its investigation of David LaMacchia, MIT very well 
> might have violated federal laws.

It is definitely legal for private entities to have strict control over
their own resources.  In particular, it is legal for a company to listen
in on their phone conversations for quality control purposes if they
announce this fact ahead of time (you may have heard such a disclaimer
when you call tech support, for instance).

Also, if a student signs such a waiver acknowledging that the situation
at this school is not necessarily that of the "norm" or of potentially
overriding state or federal law, there is a good chance the student has
signed away their right/priviledge of absolute privacy.  Unless there
is serious violation of Constitutional rights or if the contract is
constructed or negotiated in bad faith or in some illegal manner, the
old saying applies:  "a contract is a contract".

Ern