
Amazon Argues Alexa Speech Protected By First Amendment In Murder Trial Fight - molf
http://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2017/02/23/amazon-echo-alexa-murder-trial-first-amendment-rights
======
lolc
I don't understand Amazon's position here. They're being asked for evidence in
a murder investigation. I don't see how the first amendment could be construed
to protect against this. The data being asked for concerns the two involved
individuals and the request doesn't seem overly broad.

What this case does show is that Amazon puts a listening device in your home
which has a very acute understanding of your live. As they argue themselves.

~~~
IanDrake
If they lose this case, this entire product category goes in the shitter.

No one wants a government listening device in their house, which is
essentially what this is if the government can issue a search warrant for
recordings.

~~~
x1798DE
I would love for that to be the case, but I really doubt that it would be. No
one wants a government tracking device on them at all times, but I don't see
people abandoning cell phones _en masse_ because the government can get a
warrant for your location data from cell phone data towers and/or Google.

~~~
cgriswald
I see a huge difference between a device that records _its_ location (not
mine, even if the two are largely correlated) and one that records the things
I say in my own home.

A cell phone _can_ be used to record your voice or even video, but there are
technical, legal, and logistical hurdles to cross to enable that functionality
for a given phone. Alexa, in contrast, is _always on_ with the technical and
logistical hurdles already leapt and the legal one a fairly low bar if Amazon
loses here.

I can definitely see people abandoning a brand of phone that features always
on audio and/or video recording that can later be used by law enforcement
(although the frequency with which gf uses snapchat, maybe not...)

------
benmmurphy
why isn't alexa scrubbing the data or anonymising it? presumably amazon is
fighting this hard because they don't want it known that the government/amazon
effectively has a listening device in your home

~~~
Shivetya
apparently they give the ability to access your communication with Alexa with
a phone app. So they put themselves in a box by having features in an app that
prevent anonymization of the data. Going forward they may have to drop the app
or limit its functionality.

I don't have the app in question and am only extrapolating based on the text
in the article. Does anyone here have the Alexa app? What are its features?

So is law enforcement going to try to go with voluntarily allowing recording
of oneself allows them access? Push a claim that Amazon has no standing in the
case and cannot object?

~~~
milesdyson_phd
I have the app, it allows you to play back any prompt that Alexa was triggered
with. For instance the maintenance people at my apartment complex decided to
play with it and I can listen to them ask stupid stuff like: "how many apples
are in a bushel"

~~~
lawless123
Well how many are there?

~~~
CapitalistCartr
~120.

------
arca_vorago
I don't understand the use of the 1st amendment in this case, which is about
free speech, but Amazon is trying to avoid giving data to the gov which would
fall under the 4th and 5th amendments. Does anyone understand their reasoning
for this approach?

I would also like to add, And I said the same thing about Apple, this feels
like public relations via the courtroom more than a genuine desire to protect
data from the gov. Don't forget Jeff Bezos's CIA connections!

~~~
baldfat
As a non-lawyer and not legally trained it seems like 1st amendment has
nothing to do with this but 4th and 5th has everything. This is scary. It
means the 4th and 5th amendment has no power with these devices?

~~~
rayiner
The 4th amendment and 5th amendment don't protect you from having to hand over
incriminating evidence pursuant to a valid warrant. If the government suspects
_e.g._ you're part of a criminal organization and have tapes with your co-
conspirators (for future blackmail purposes) hidden in your house, it can get
a warrant and get those tapes. It can play those tapes to the jury. The only
thing the 5th amendment protects you from is the government making you testify
against yourself.

------
jasonvorhe
So much for the rhetoric of the malicious company that's putting 1984 devices
into living rooms for the government.

~~~
dovdovdov
How do you know the exact number of devices, suspicious.

~~~
gm-conspiracy
I think he meant the devices were first patented in 1984.

~~~
q4814
_Ahem_ Orwell's 1984. It's a book.

~~~
zepto
I bought that as an ebook on Amazon but it got remotely deleted for
'copyright' reasons from my kindle so I never got to read it. Is there
something about listening devices in it?

~~~
tajen
Surely you're joking. Kindle himself deleting books that warn against Alexa
technology, "for copyright reasons", is worth both a good laugh and a war.

If you're not joking, please write a blogpost about it and post it on HN.

~~~
zepto
I don't need to blog about it - it was headline news:

[https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2009/jul/17/amazon-
ki...](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2009/jul/17/amazon-kindle-1984)

------
rebootthesystem
This might be an important case for the future of robotics at home. Imagine a
day when androids or highly capable home robots are inexpensive and
commonplace. They will see and hear everything you do.

Let's extend that to the same kinds of robots at work. Working alongside
humans, participating in meetings, completing various tasks internal and
external to the business. Maybe even interacting with similar robots at other
companies, vendors, etc.

Not sure any rights regarding these scenarios are well defined today.

~~~
SomeStupidPoint
Why would the situation be any different than a person or traditional
recording equipment doing those things?

If you want to live with observers, you have always had to accept that they
can be used in court.

~~~
rebootthesystem
I'll let an attorney answer this. I think there's a huge difference. Part of
it being that, as far as I know, there's no case law for the scenario of a
robot being a part of a person's daily life while recording data from an array
of sensors, including vision and sound.

~~~
SomeStupidPoint
But how are robot sensors different than if I choose to have, eg security
cameras around my house or a maid doing the cleaning? In fact, the robot
sounds _exactly_ like a live in maid, who can _already_ be compelled to
testify on my activities.

Both the camera footage and maid testimony can be demanded by the courts, so
why would a hybrid of the two be different?

~~~
rebootthesystem
I think you might be confusing logical thinking with the way the legal system
works.

I hope an attorney on HN can comment on this. Happy to be wrong but I don't
think I am, at least not massively wrong.

------
Tloewald
This is bonkers. The idea that someone hearing you and being required to
testify against you violates the first amendment is ridiculous, so why should
a device be different from a person?

~~~
WorldMaker
Maybe it's more akin to the fifth amendment rights of a spouse/significant
other/close family? I don't think Amazon would have an easy case in either
direction, but at least to this layman it sounds more like a fifth amendment
issue than a first amendment issue.

~~~
WorldMaker
This answers my question well:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13714797](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13714797)

------
gm-conspiracy
So, is there any coincidence that this is where Walmart HQ is located (some
proxy battle)?

Why has no other police department in the country attempted this?

~~~
maxerickson
The intersection of hard to prove murders and Alexa is going to be tiny.

~~~
gm-conspiracy
I would guess tiny is > 1.

This took place what, two year ago?

5 murders per 100,000 people (US average).

318 million people in the US, so 15,900 murder per year.

Amazon has sold over 5 million echos in the last 2 years.

So, Amazon would have to sell over 159 billion Echos, before a second murder
overlap in the US?

If we assume all are US based, that would be about 1.5% of the population has
Echos?

~~~
maxerickson
I think it is an important factor that many murders are quite straightforward,
so it isn't just the overall rate, it's the rate where the Alexa evidence is
important enough to pursue.

I also wonder how many people own more than 1 echo (probably only hundreds of
thousands so not all that important to estimating the number of homes being
listened to. I guess Amazon could tell us how many users they have though).

------
tagawa
Slightly off-topic but could we encourage (or automate) using HTTPS story
links when available?

~~~
Oxitendwe
For what purpose, exactly?

------
coldcode
It was bound to happen. Next up, are robots people?

~~~
ocdtrekkie
No, but companies are (sigh). This is really an expression of Citizens United.
Alexa and Siri use cute names to cover it, but "Ok Google" reveals what you're
really interacting with for these sorts of tools: You're talking to a company.

~~~
JBReefer
This isn't really an HN quality comment. It's dismissive, you don't make a
strong point, and it's not really interesting - this is just a rehashing of a
common political opinion/disagreement with Citizens United.

Please, please don't let HN become Reddit.

~~~
ocdtrekkie
I respectfully disagree. The parent comment was insinuating this was about
bots or robots, which it really isn't. Chat-like interface aside, Alexa is no
more a "robot" than Gmail or the Amazon.com homepage: It's just an interface
to a company's web service.

And while I added a (sigh) which indicates some disapproval for the Citizens
United decision, my comment wasn't meant to start a conversation of the merits
of that decision, but simply indicate that this was effectively a corporate
personhood case. If anything, I added the (sigh) because of my concern that I
would get downvoted into oblivion by other people who disagree with the
Citizens United decision. :/

Please, please don't let HN become Reddit. Don't comment just to tell someone
you think their comment is low quality and uninteresting.

------
vanattab
Can we get the click bait title changed. Amazon is arguing that the consumer
first amendment rights extend to alexa recordings.

~~~
moron4hire
No, they are also claiming it extends to Alexa's responses.

