Arne

Sorry if this is somewhat out of order.

Not exactly. As I said, businesses don't have Fourth Amendment rights per se, and business records are treated differently from a legal standpoint than are individual people's papers and such.

Anti corporatism meets the surveillance society...many friends are made. You are not arguing that the content of a call is a business record, are you? Although, I am not sure how this is relevant unless you are.

You're a business. If you weren't charging, that might be different, but CALEA only applies to businesses.

First, CALEA is not a roving wiretap. If you are arguing that fourth amendment protection is dependent upon whether you charge someone money, then it will be very easy to avoid roving wiretaps. Oovoo is free, right? Unless, by "charging", you meant any consideration at all, and at that point there is no distinction between a business and non business.

I think you're arguing something else than "roving wiretaps" (or even CALEA). Do you have a specific fact situation we can consider and discuss?

I am trying, but statements like "But that's not my hypothetical" don't help.

I agree that "roving wiretaps" are a bit more akin to "any house that might have used" [or more specifically, "use", seeing as "roving wiretaps" allow for only those phones that the suspect does indeed purchase or use]. But that's a far cry from "any house, period".

How about if we agree on the language "any house that may contain evidence against me." Do you think this language is compatible with the language of the fourth amendment?

That's not the way "roving wiretaps" work. The suspect would have to have an account there. And the information collected would have to be limited to the communications of that suspect.

I probably should have been more explicit, but yes, in my second hypothetical I have an account on your VOIP server. So back to my question. Should you have less fourth amendment rights in my second hypothetical than in my first? And if so, why? Remember you are not charging me any money because of your kind nature.

Not exactly. As I said, businesses don't have Fourth Amendment rights per se, and business records are treated differently from a legal standpoint than are individual people's papers and such.

Again, are you arguing that call content is a business record?

You're a business. If you weren't charging, that might be different, but CALEA only applies to businesses.

Can wiretaps, roving or otherwise, only be applied to businesses? Would you be exempt from complying with a wiretap order, roving or otherwise, in my second hypothetical?