Gross McGinley LLP

Blog Disclaimer

Blog Disclaimer

This Blog is intended for educational and informational purposes and intended to only provide you with a general understanding of the law, not to provide any legal advice, including on the subject of the Blog. Laws that may pertain to this Blog will vary by jurisdiction, and the information on this blog may not apply to you. The content within this Blog is not intended, and should not be construed, in any way to be legal advice and thus you should not rely on any information provided in the Blog as legal advice. You should consult with appropriate legal counsel concerning any issues for which legal advice may be needed. Your review or use of the Blog and the content therein is not intended to create, and does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Please contact us if you have any questions about a Blog or would like more information, but, by contacting us, no attorney-client relationship is formed between you and Gross McGinley, LLP, including the Blog author. Do not send any confidential information to Gross McGinley, LLP or the authors of the Blog without first speaking to one of our lawyers and receiving our permission to provide confidential information. Unsolicited confidential information sent to us may not be subject to an attorney-client privilege and may not be treated as confidential. This Blog is not published for advertising or solicitation purposes. Gross McGinley, LLP disclaims all liability to all persons for any claim, loss, liability or any damages that may arise in connection with the Blog and any content or information contained in the Blog. Even though we strive to create our Blog content based on our current understanding of the law, we cannot and do not guarantee that the content and information in the Blog is current, accurate, or complete. Gross McGinley, LLP owns the copyright in the Blog, which is protected by federal and state laws, including copyright laws. The Blog cannot be altered or modified in any way. A copy of the Blog may be used and printed only for personal, educational, informational and noncommercial purposes. The Blog cannot be used for any other purpose without the express permission of Gross McGinley, LLP.

The Prosecution Calls to the Witness Stand: Alexa™

Written by: on December 29, 2016 | Category: Blog | Tags: ,

Internet-connected personal assistant devices, such as Amazon Echo and Google Home, are becoming increasingly popular as people have begun to rely on the always-alert microphone systems for personal reminders (e.g., remind me to call Jessica on her anniversary) and random and topical questions of interest (as in, who was the musician that was married to Carrie Fisher?). As the phrase “always-alert” indicates, there are myriad privacy issues surrounding these devices and systems which have been the subject of discussion among consumer advocate groups and professionals in data and personal privacy matters and legal issues.  Now the debate has entered the sinister world of criminal law after Arkansas police requested Amazon Echo recording data from Amazon which they think may hold clues to a murder case from November of 2015.  As Law & Order fans know, the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of unreasonable search and seizure protects us from arbitrary and unfair governmental intrusions whenever we have a reasonable expectation of privacy.  This right was further fleshed out in 1986 when Congress passed the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) to limit and specify the instances in which government actors may access one’s electronic communications, including phone lines, email and electronic correspondences and tracing, and electronic money transfers.

However, in this case, the defendant who is suspected of murder invited Alexa™ into his home; he likely waived his reasonable expectation of privacy by voluntarily purchasing and installing the Echo device, and allowing it to listen to him and report back to Amazon. No one envies the PR issues faced by Amazon… avoiding the perception or accusation that it refuses to aid in a murder investigation while at the same time adhering to its own privacy and data collection policies and encouraging everyone in the world to buy an Echo and forget that it’s essentially a sophisticated fly-on-the-wall on every wall in your house, with potentially infinite recording and storage capacity.  The legal issues are similarly multi-faceted and brain-twisting. What information does Amazon receive, store, and associate with individual users – device type, aural information, metadata, location?  Would data include conversations by and with other people who did not voluntarily waive their rights to privacy?  Who may be minors or weren’t even aware of a listening device in the room?  Beyond this, could police obtain and couple this data with other “smart” devices including climate control and monitoring systems (like Nest™) and home utility usage and alarm systems?  The “Internet of Things” has made life easier and safer in countless ways, but will continue to create legal and privacy issues as we struggle to fully understand the legal repercussions of the tech we all asked Santa for.  Also, someone should tell Alexa that snitches get stitches.

As a member of Gross McGinley’s Internet Law and Intellectual Property Groups, Nicole J. O’Hara provides guidance to businesses on matters involving online privacy, data collection, online communications, and more.

Next Previous
View All Attorneys
View All Practice Areas
View Blog