Aggregator

令和6年度補正・令和7年度当初予算　「スタートアップ創出型萌芽的研究開発支援事業」研究管理機関の公募

情報通信審議会　郵政政策部会　郵便料金政策委員会（第7回）　開催案内

携帯音声通信事業者による契約者等の本人確認等及び携帯音声通信役務の不正な利用の防止に関する法律施行規則の一部を改正する省令案に対する意見募集

接続料の算定等に関する研究会（第92回）

「eシールに係る認定制度の関係規程策定のための有識者会議取りまとめ（案）」及び 「eシールに係る認証業務の認定に関する規程（案）」に対する意見募集

「大規模自然災害時における通信サービス確保のための連携訓練」 （中国地域）の実施

無線設備規則の一部を改正する省令案及び電波法関係審査基準の一部を改正する訓令案に係る意見募集

　米軍空母艦載機の陸上離発着訓練の移転を伴う自衛隊基地整備が進む鹿児島県西之表市の馬毛島に11月15日、住民訴訟原告や弁護団ら６人が23年1月の工事着工後、防衛省が頑なに阻んできた上陸を果たし、初の視察を試みた。同行したＪＣＪ会員の丹原美穂さんや弁護団事務局長の塚本和也弁護士の報告から、馬毛島の現状の一端をお伝えする。 　　　　　海には基地用の湾岸工事の巨大レーンを積んだ台船がずらり＝撮影・丹原 美穂さん　「弁護団や住民、地元議員らが島に視察に訪れると防衛省の警戒船に阻まれ。..

地方財政審議会委員の任命

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　11月29日、東京都目黒区のアマゾンジャパン合同会社本社前に、Ａｍａｚｏｎ配達員やその支援者、弁護士、市民ら60人ほどが集まった。この日は世界各国でＡｍａｚｏｎはじめネットショッピング・サイトで行われる「ブラックフライデー」と呼ばれる大規模セール期間中。配達員として働く労働者は過酷な数日間の真っただ中にいる。　日本におけるＡｍａｚｏｎ配達員はアマゾンジャパン社に直接雇用されておらず、一次・二次下請けの配送会社と契約する「個人事業主」..

Last week, EFF, along with the Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan, ACLU, and ACLU of Michigan, filed an amicus brief in People v. Carson in the Supreme Court of Michigan, challenging the constitutionality of the search warrant of Mr. Carson's smart phone.

In this case, Mr. Carson was arrested for stealing money from his neighbor's safe with a co-conspirator. A few months later, law enforcement applied for a search warrant for Mr. Carson's cell phone. The search warrant enumerated the claims that formed the basis for Mr. Carson's arrest, but the only mention of a cell phone was a law enforcement officer's general assertion that phones are communication devices often used in the commission of crimes. A warrant was issued which allowed the search of the entirety of Mr. Carson's smart phone, with no temporal or category limits on the data to be searched. Evidence found on the phone was then used to convict Mr. Carson.

On appeal, the Court of Appeals made a number of rulings in favor of Mr. Carson, including that evidence from the phone should not have been admitted because the search warrant lacked particularity and was unconstitutional. The government's appeal to the Michigan Supreme Court was accepted and we filed an amicus brief.

In our brief, we argued that the warrant was constitutionally deficient and overbroad, because there was no probable cause for searching the cell phone and that the warrant was insufficiently particular because it failed to limit the search to within a time frame or certain categories of information.

As the U.S. Supreme Court recognized in Riley v. California, electronic devices such as smart phones “differ in both a quantitative and a qualitative sense” from other objects. The devices contain immense storage capacities and are filled with sensitive and revealing data, including apps for everything from banking to therapy to religious practices to personal health. As the refrain goes, whatever the need, “there's an app for that.” This special nature of digital devices requires courts to review warrants to search digital devices with heightened attention to the Fourth Amendment’s probable cause and particularity requirements.

In this case, the warrant fell far short. In order for there to be probable cause to search an item, the warrant application must establish a “nexus” between the incident being investigated and the place to be searched. But the application in this case gave no reason why evidence of the theft would be found on Mr. Carson's phone. Instead, it only stated the allegations leading to Mr. Carson's arrest and boilerplate language about cell phone use among criminals. While those facts may establish probable cause to arrest Mr. Carson, they did not establish probable cause to search Mr. Carson's phone. If it were otherwise, the government would always be able to search the cell phone of someone they had probable cause to arrest, thereby eradicating the independent determination of whether probable cause exists to search something. Without a nexus between the crime and Mr. Carson’s phone, there was no probable cause.

Moreover, the warrant allowed for the search of “any and all data” contained on the cell phone, with no limits whatsoever. This type of "all content" warrants are the exact type of general warrants against which the Fourth Amendment and its state corollaries were meant to protect. Cell phone search warrants that have been upheld have contained temporal constraints and a limit to the categories of data to be searched. Neither limitations—or any other limitations—were in the issued search warrant. The police should have used date limitations in applying for the search warrant, as they do in their warrant applications for other searches in the same investigation. Additionally, the warrant allowed the search of all the information on the phone, the vast majority of which did not—and could not—contain evidence related to the investigation.

As smart phones become more capacious and entail more functions, it is imperative that courts adhere to the narrow construction of warrants for the search of electronic devices to support the basic purpose of the Fourth Amendment to safeguard the privacy and security of individuals against arbitrary invasions by governmental officials.

　【おすすめ本】日向咲嗣『｢黒塗り公文書｣の闇を暴く』─公共事業の民間委託に絡む｢黒塗りの闇｣を剥がす＝関口威人(ジャーナリスト)　大いにうなずき、共感しながら読んだ。　起こっているのは、日本のどの自治体でも大なり小なり同じようなことだろう。しかし、それを明るみに出すのに、どれだけの時間と労力がかかるものかと、心寒くなる。　著者が主に取り上げるのは、和歌山市民図書館を運営するため、民間委託を受けた蔦屋書店を巡る不透明な手続きや契約である。　情報公開を求めて出された計画策定時の..

2025年1月19日、総合格闘技などの大会場・ワシントンDCのキャピタル・ワン・アリーナで、2万人以上の支持者に向け、赤い共和党のトランプは勝利宣言をしました。　格闘技が大好きなトランプは、米大統領選挙の終盤時にも、マスクなどの取り巻きを御供に、親友でダナ・ホワイトUFC（Ultimate Fighting Championship総合格闘技団体）会長が主催する試合を見に行きました。　アメリカ教育省長官には、リンダ・マクマホンWWE（World Wrestling Entertainment世界プロレス団体）の元会長を指名しています。