Current Conditions
35°F - CLEAR
Court OKs look at reporters' files
Lancaster New Era
Mar 10, 2006 13:19 EST
By Janet Kelley And Ad Crable

The complete text of this article is no longer available online.

Recent Posts
Showing 5 most recent comments out of 22 total TalkBack comments about this article
View full comments | Comment on this article
"The government simply doesn't have the ability or the right, nor should it, in a free democracy, to seize the work-product materials, source information, computer hard drives, folders with paper, cabinet drawers of a newspaper," he argued.

Feudale ruled Feb. 23 that the state could seize the computers but view only Internet data relevant to the case. The judge also ordered the agent who withdraws the data to show them to him first - before passing them to prosecutors - to ensure that the journalists' other confidential files are not compromised. The ruling was stayed pending appeal to the State Supreme Court.

In the newspaper's appeal, DeStefano argued that the ramifications of allowing government officials to have control over a newspaper's computers, no matter the restrictions imposed, are frightening.

"Permitting the attorney general to seize and search unfettered the workstations will result in the very chilling of information," DeStefano wrote. "Confidential tips, leads, and other forms of information will undoubtedly dry up once sources and potential sources learn that Lancaster Newspapers' workstations were taken out of its possession and turned over to investigations."

In response, the state argued that "the newspaper has not produced one shred of evidence that the computer hard drives contain information protected from disclosure."

In a one-page order dated Wednesday, the Supreme Court declined to hear the case on procedural grounds, freeing the state to examine the hard drives.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact staff writer John Shiffman at 215-854-2658 or jshiffman@phillynews.com.
Daisy Lee Myers
QUOTE(Daisy Lee Myers @ Mar 13 2006, 12:58 PM)
NO APPEAL

Philadelphia Inquirer | 03/13/2006 | Pa. seizes paper's computer hard disks

http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/14084455.htm


QUOTE
The site contained nonpublic details of local crimes. The newspaper allegedly used some of those details in articles.


Yeah those non-public details are all over the place.
BuffaloBill
QUOTE(Gilby @ Mar 13 2006, 04:35 PM)
What's the big deal about this? If they can prove the newspaper got into the website when it wasn't supposed to...it's theft of services. It is illegal.

The website was set up with certain access rights. The newspaper did not have access. They wanted access, found someone who could give it to them, and used it.

It was wrong. You can call it hacking, you can call it whatever you want. It is still wrong. The owners of the website did not want them to have access. To gain access to this information is illegal.

The access codes are probably given out individually to a person/group. Someone who isn't in that group and still used their passwords can fall under "Identity Theft".

The correct thing the website should have done is try to limit IP addresses if they are accessed by certain people in combination with the username/password combination.

Both parties are at fault there. The person who had access and gave it to them and the people who used it. They have to get the computers to trace past history and logs. Yes, you can delete your "history" in your browser - but you cannot easily erase the logs of what you do.


Very well stated!

If someone crack into these guys computers and put the information out there.... they'd be pissed.
electricbender

LancasterOnline.com: News : Court OKs inspection of reporters' computers
http://local.lancasteronline.com/6/21327
Daisy Lee Myers
Make certain you look at

LipNews1.com and see the ironic editorial that the Intell wrote several years ago!

rh
RonHarper
Top Ads