Court rules your boss can’t read your email & texts

By Mark O’Neill
Contributing Writer, [GAS]

In a landmark ruling, a US federal appeals court has declared that employers are not allowed to read employees work emails and text messages without getting a warrant first.

But the ruling only applies to situations where the company outsources its email and texts to an outside company and not if it is done in-house on internal servers.

The ruling comes after a police officer, Jeff Quon, sued his department for reading his work text messages, some of which were personal and sexually explicit to his wife.   The company that stored the messages, Arch Wireless, was found to have violated the Stored Communications Act and the court said that Quon’s messages were protected under the Fourth Amendment.

Personally speaking, how stupid is Quon to use a police department pager with taxpayers money to send sexually explicit messages to his wife?   Then when he is caught, instead of apologizing and offering to reimburse the department, he proceeds to sue his department (who then has to use more taxpayers money to defend themselves) for more financial compensation!

To be honest, I am not all that sure that this ruling is actually good.   Shouldn’t employers have the power to check to see if idiots like Quon are abusing their employer’s trust?   I am all for privacy, but if employees are using work accounts for personal gain, the employer should have the ability to verify what’s going on.

Your opinions, as usual, are always welcomed!

Via Los Angeles Times

Advertisement





14 Responses to Court rules your boss can’t read your email & texts

  1. Just because law enforcment can look thru a wall with technology doesnt automaticly give the the right to look thru the wall.

    When you want to invade some ones pricacy get a warrent. It is a no brainer. Another big mistake made by law enforcemnent.

  2. Just because law enforcment can look thru a wall with technology doesnt automaticly give the the right to look thru the wall.

    When you want to invade some ones pricacy get a warrent. It is a no brainer. Another big mistake made by law enforcemnent.

  3. Hmmm, Well, I think using the companies equipment to send the messages was wrong. If it was his own phone & they read em…then yes, they should be sued. But this was provided TO him. I think the cop is wrong.

  4. Hmmm, Well, I think using the companies equipment to send the messages was wrong. If it was his own phone & they read em…then yes, they should be sued. But this was provided TO him. I think the cop is wrong.

  5. What he was doing is irrelevant to the issue of whether what his department was doing was legal. Keep your issues separate, as they should be, and you won't get confused.

  6. What he was doing is irrelevant to the issue of whether what his department was doing was legal. Keep your issues separate, as they should be, and you won’t get confused.

  7. I believe that you always need a warrant. I mean come on, this is common sense…. Your looking into someone's space which is trespassing… simple "Warrant" !

    glyphius … tsk tsk

    • but it's not "your" space – it's your employer's space and you're on their clock being paid by them. Don't you think they deserve to know what you are doing on their dime?

  8. I believe that you always need a warrant. I mean come on, this is common sense…. Your looking into someone’s space which is trespassing… simple “Warrant” !
    glyphius … tsk tsk

    • but it’s not “your” space – it’s your employer’s space and you’re on their clock being paid by them. Don’t you think they deserve to know what you are doing on their dime?