Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> BC Law Intell. Prop. & Tech. Forum
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Intellectual Property Law
: BC Law Intell. Prop. & Tech. ForumAnother Court Recognizes an Expectation of Privacy Over E-mail
By paul
From National Economic Research Associates, Inc. (”NERA”) v. Evans, 21 Mass.L.Rptr. 337 (Mass. Super. 2006):
NERA contends that any reasonable person would have known that the hard disk of a computer makes a ?screen shot? of all it sees, which the computer then stores in a temporary file, including e-mails retrieved from a private password-protected e-mail account on the Internet. NERA further contends that any reasonable person would have known that these temporary files, although not readily accessible to the average user, may be located and retrieved by a forensic computer expert. This Court does not agree that any reasonable person would have known this information. Certainly, until this motion, this Court did not know of the routine storing of ?screen shots? from private Internet e-mail accounts on a computer’s hard disk.
Furthermore:
The bottom line is that, if an employer wishes to read an employee’s attorney-client communications unintentionally stored in a temporary file on a company-owned computer that were made via a private, password-protected e-mail account accessed through the Internet, not the company’s Intranet, the employer must plainly communicate to the employee that:
1. all such e-mails are stored on the hard disk of the company’s computer in a ?screen shot? temporary file; and
2. the company expressly reserves the right to retrieve those temporary files and read them.
Only after receiving such clear guidance can employees fairly be expected to understand that their reasonable expectation in the privacy of these attorney-client communications has been compromised by the employer.
Full post as published by BC Law Intell. Prop. & Tech. Forum on November 26, 2007 (boomark / email).
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
Privacy Protection Act 42 USC 21A
Federal Newsroom Law
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
Heart of Atlanta v United States
Supreme Court Decision: Civil Rights Act Protected by Interstate Commerce Clause
Explicit E-Mail
Adult website fined $413,000 in explicit e-mail matter.
Google Sued for Violating the Privacy Rights of Millions of Americans
Google Sued for Violating the Privacy Rights of Millions of Americans
Daniel V. Leccese Sr.
$250,000 fine for felony mail fraud.
AOL Privacy Class Action
Can Proceed
CVS Mailing
Sparks Allegations of Privacy Violation
Automated Calls
Voice Mail Broadcasting Corp. pays $180,000 FTC settlement for telemarketing violations.

Pop quiz: Reasonable expectation of privacy
Pretrial detainee had no expectation of privacy in her outgoing mail
No reasonable expectation of privacy in a computer left on in a common area
LA: No expectation of privacy in what could be seen through the garage door of a business
No REP in work computer with a warning banner of no privacy
Expectation of privacy on back porch at 11:30 p.m.








