Should be given to data stored on smart phones. This is an hour. Well hear argument first this morning in case , riley v. California. Mr. Fisher . Mr. Chief justice, and may it please the court this case involves applying the core protection of the Fourth Amendment to a new factual circumstance. It has always been the case that an occasion of an arrest did not give the Police Officers authority to search through the private papers and the drawers and bureaus and cabinets of somebodys house, and that protection should not evaporate more than years after the founding because we have the Technological Development of smartphones that have resulted in people carrying that information in their pockets. Just just to test the principle for why the police ca search and seize some some objects. Consider a gun. The arrestee has a gun on his person and the police take the gun. Is part of the reason for that seizure to obtain evidence of the crime or is it just for the safety of the officer and the
Hoshost it. I have to assume it happens a lot. Did he have any advice . He hasnt done it. I asked if he would join me. What did he say . No. I said i would pay him. I dont think i have come up with the right number. You mentioned you talk today other host . Any good feedback . They tried to screw me. No kidding. I called many of the guy and thankfully i know them kind of. They were gracious to give me pointers on what the evening is like. And all of them kind of without speaking all separately they said it is the strangest most wonderful evening. It is like no other gig. It is bizarre but you are with the president and sitting with the first lady. There is no ever gig in history where before you perform, there is zero break between you and the president and before that you sitting next to the first lady for two hours. It is crazy. In prepping for this, have you gone back and watched what some of the guys did . I have seen them before and watched them. There is only so much you can do b
But let me ask you this suppose your client were an Old School Guy and he didnt have he didnt have a cell phone. He had a billfold and he had photos that were important to him in the billfold. He had that at the time of arrest. Do you dispute the proposition that the police could examine the photos in his billfold and use those as evidence against him . No. Thats the rule of robinson, that any physical item itemon a arrestee can be seized and inspected and then used as evidence if its useful evidence. We draw a line. Yes. What is the difference between looking at hardcopy photos in a billfold and looking at photos that are saved in the memory of a cell in the memory of a cell phone . The difference is Digital Information versus physical items. Physical items at the scene can pose a safety threat and have destruction possibilities that arent present with digital evidence. What is more, once you get into the digital world, you have the framers concern of general warrants and the the writ
Their broadcast signals available at a local area and they are limited because that is what the broadcasters make available and simply providing a user guide that says you continue this channel or you can tune into that channel if you want to pick up on program or another cant be the difference between a content provider and in facilitating the use of your equipment. Case 13132 riley v. California. Mr. Fischer. Mr. Chief justice and may it please the court. This case it involves applying the core production of the fifth amendment to a new factual circumstance. It has eyes been the case that an occasion of an arrested not give the Police Officers authority to search through the private papers and bureaus and cabinets of somebodys house. That protection should not evaporate more than 200 years after the founding because we have the Technological Development of smartphones that have resulted in people carrying that information in their pockets. Just to test the principle for why the polic
Networks and tv stations can expect to be paid when their content is rebroadcast. Movie studios like the decision because it protects copyright on tv series and movies. On the losing side, aereo and devicemakers. We there the Consumer Electronics Association Decision by the Supreme Court today, disruptive to innovation. Here is the argument from april. Argument in case 13461, American Broadcasting Companies versus aereo. Mr. Clement. Mr. Chief justice and may it please the court. Aereos Business Model is to allow thousanding of paying strangers to watch live tv online. The aereos legal argument it can make that happen without publicly performing. Congress has statute that squarely forecloses that rather counter intier tiff submission. The internet and mini antennas are new, the basic service aereo is providing is not materially different from the Service Provided by Cable Company before this court in 1969. Where are they not the everybody has been arguing this case as if for sure theyr