The IT Law Wiki
Explore
Main Page
All Pages
Community
Interactive Maps
Random page
TopContent
Most Visited Pages
Cell phone
Radio frequency spectrum
RFID tag
Cloud consumer
Internet
Newly Changed Pages
Computer terminal
Persuasive evidence
Website operator
Bfdi
Email bombing
Pornography
Message modification
Most Popular Pages
community
Community portal
forum
FANDOM
Fan Central
BETA
Games
Anime
Movies
TV
Video
Wikis
Explore Wikis
Community Central
Start a Wiki
Don't have an account?
Register
Sign In
Sign In
Register
The IT Law Wiki
34,539
pages
Explore
Main Page
All Pages
Community
Interactive Maps
Random page
TopContent
Most Visited Pages
Cell phone
Radio frequency spectrum
RFID tag
Cloud consumer
Internet
Newly Changed Pages
Computer terminal
Persuasive evidence
Website operator
Bfdi
Email bombing
Pornography
Message modification
Most Popular Pages
community
Community portal
forum
Editing
U.S. v. N.Y. Telephone
(section)
Back to page
Edit
Edit source
View history
Talk (0)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
== Factual Background == The U.S. District Court had authorized the [[FBI]] to [[install]] and use a [[pen register]]<ref>Pen registers do not “intercept” because they do not acquire the “contents” of communications, as that term is defined by 18 U.S.C. §2510(8). Indeed, a law enforcement official could not even determine from the use of a pen register whether a communication existed. These devices do not hear sound. They disclose only the telephone numbers that have been dialed — a means of establishing communication. Neither the purport of any communication between the caller and the recipient of the call, their identities, nor whether the call was even completed is disclosed by pen registers.</ref> on two telephones used by the suspects of a government investigation. The court also directed the telephone company to furnish the [[FBI]] "all information, facilities and technical assistance" necessary to [[install]] and use the device. The telephone company refused to comply with the court's order. The company informed the government agents of the location of the "appearance" — the spot where the specific telephone line emerges from the sealed telephone cable — to help the [[FBI]] install its own wires, but the company refused to provide a “leased line” to the [[FBI]], a process the FBI argued was needed to ensure the unobtrusiveness of the [[surveillance]] device.
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to the The IT Law Wiki are considered to be released under the CC-BY-SA
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Follow on IG
TikTok
Join Fan Lab