Telcos could be liable for tens of billions

[Tuesday_Morning]

AT&T, Bell South and Verizon could be liable for mucho dinero. ThinkProgress lays out why:

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/05/11/telcos-liable/

1. It violates the Stored Communications Act. The Stored Communications Act, Section 2703(c), provides exactly five exceptions that would permit a phone company to disclose to the government the list of calls to or from a subscriber: (i) a warrant; (ii) a court order; (iii) the customer’s consent; (iv) for telemarketing enforcement; or (v) by “administrative subpoena.” The first four clearly don’t apply. As for administrative subpoenas, where a government agency asks for records without court approval, there is a simple answer – the NSA has no administrative subpoena authority, and it is the NSA that reportedly got the phone records.

2. The penalty for violating the Stored Communications Act is $1000 per individual violation. Section 2707 of the Stored Communications Act gives a private right of action to any telephone customer “aggrieved by any violation.” If the phone company acted with a “knowing or intentional state of mind,” then the customer wins actual harm, attorney’s fees, and “in no case shall a person entitled to recover receive less than the sum of $1,000.”

(The phone companies might say they didn’t “know” they were violating the law. But USA Today reports that Qwest’s lawyers knew about the legal risks, which are bright and clear in the statute book.)

3. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act doesn’t get the telcos off the hook. According to USA Today, the NSA did not go to the FISA court to get a court order. And Qwest is quoted as saying that the Attorney General would not certify that the request was lawful under FISA. So FISA provides no defense for the phone companies, either.

In other words, for every 1 million Americans whose records were turned over to NSA, the telcos could be liable for $1 billion in penalties, plus attorneys fees. You do the math.

– Peter Swire and Judd Legum

[Kingshakabobo]

1. Why do I get the feeling a law will be passed to make it legal....

....RETROACTIVELY....and provide protection from them evil trial lawyers.

[TomInTib]

3. I'll bet immunity was granted up-front. nt

[TechBear_Seattle]

8. Ex post facto ("after the fact") laws are expressly unconstitutional

Then again, when has this administration ever even paid lip-service to the Constitution?

[Kingshakabobo]

9. Probably not for civil liability. No? I dunno. n/t

[BillZBubb]

2. Beautiful! I hope a class action starts very soon.

Bring the fascist enablers to their knees.

[liberaltrucker]

6. ACLU filed a class-action suit today

:woohoo:

[BillZBubb]

10. Excellent!!!!!!

[simonm]

4. Telcos are not stupid

They most likely have a written immunity contract to cover their ass. We will probably end up paying for the lawsuits with our tax dollars.

[BillZBubb]

11. Maybe we'll all get our $100 from the Repugs after all!

Just not for gasoline.

Actually, I doubt if they could get immunity in any binding form without a prior act of Congress. The law is very specific about what they can and cannot do with phone information. Qwest was very smart to keep out of this scheme.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

5. I Hope They Get Fucked Hard For This.

I'm thinking so much tonight about alternative phone service I could get to ditch verizon completely. And my wireless contract is up in a few months too. Ain't no way I'm resigning.

[liberaltrucker]

7. V Wireless is my ISP on the road

As much as I'd like to dump them, from a practical
standpoint, I can't. Bummer.