Computers, Privacy & the Constitution

View   r3  >  r2  ...
NealBurstynSecondPaper 3 - 09 May 2015 - Main.NealBurstyn
Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="SecondPaper"

BART and the Cellphone Kill Switch

Line: 13 to 13
 

The BART Shutdown

On August 11, 2011, Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) temporarily interrupted cellphone service at select stations to disable the communications of an organized protest and, thus, by their words, “ensure the safety of everyone on the platform.” The rationale behind the interruption in service was that organized protesters were planning to disrupt BART service which would ultimately “lead to platform overcrowding and unsafe conditions.”
Changed:
<
<		The shutdown caused an uproar, triggering accusations that that the shutdown “stifled free speech” and drawing comparisons to oppressive methods employed by “Middle East dictators.”
>
>		The shutdown caused an uproar, triggering accusations that that the shutdown “stifled free speech” and drawing comparisons to oppressive methods employed by “Middle East dictators.”
 BART allegedly “acknowledged the problem with their actions” and promulgated a new cell service interruption policy in December 2011 that would recognize its commitment to First Amendment rights of expression. The new policy purports to allow temporary interruptions only when BART “determines that there is strong evidence of imminent unlawful activity that threatens the safety of District passengers, employees and other members of the public.”
Line: 41 to 41
 If we go back to the idea that I had as a lay person that BART had the right to flip the switch as proprietor of the equipment, the Commenters dutifully address this as well, noting that BART “did not and cannot own” the airwaves over which cellular networks operate. Moreover, any consideration of the proprietorship of the equipment or the public forum doctrine is simply irrelevant when the actions are insulated from judicial scrutiny.
Changed:
<
<		This discussion thus illustrates why the FOIA request in EPIC v. Homeland Security is potentially crucial to understanding what SOP 303 and incidents like the BART shutdown actually are in terms of First Amendment jurisprudence.
>
>		This discussion thus illustrates why the FOIA request in EPIC v. Homeland Security is potentially crucial to understanding what SOP 303 and incidents like the BART shutdown actually are in terms of First Amendment jurisprudence.
 

Revision 3r3 - 09 May 2015 - 14:51:42 - NealBurstyn
Revision 2r2 - 08 May 2015 - 14:07:54 - NealBurstyn
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
Syndicate this site RSSATOM