I hope that the 9th Circuit's United States v. Forrester decision is not upheld. Capturing one's electronic contact information seems very much like seizing one's address book from one's home, vehicle, or business. Much of a personal nature can be inferred from contact information, and the information can conceivably be used for harmful purposes. I don't see how unwarranted seizure of such information could be considered unlawful.

Is semantic play being used to obtain free rein? Perhaps only those who are "targeted,” with or without the obtaining or a warrant, are considered to be truly surveilled. Perhaps the rest of us are considered to be deconstructed into data passing through the pipes, completely free from mentionable personal risk .

In the next to last sentence, “obtaining or a warrant” should have been “obtaining of a warrant.”

In Forrest Gump/"stupid is--what stupid does"/as in technology/there are redundantcy's..

Having something as simple as an ADDRESS Book crumble your affais is exactly the truth about wandering into strange territories..but then some people are just that way...an accident looking for a place too happen../

The latest in Connecitcut is the "stolen Laptop"..or as I like to offer...the BIG ADDRESS BOOK.