It sounds like you’d make a better lawyer than whoever brought this case.
I agree with you for whatever it’s worth.
the question here is, on it’s face does an invasion of privacy constitute an injury? I’d argue that yes, it does. Privacy has inherent value, and that value is lost the moment that private data is exposed. That’s the injury that needs to be redressed, regardless of whether or how the exposed data is used after the exposure. There could be additional injury in how the data is used, and that would have to be adjudicated and compensated separately, but losing the assurance that my data can never be used against me because it is only know to me is absolutely an injury in and of itself.
cybersandwich@lemmy.world 10 months ago
TheHighRoad@lemmy.world 10 months ago
For privacy to have inherent value, it first must be an established, inherent right. Unfortunately, the Constitution doesn’t talk about it to my knowledge. I’ve always inferred that our rights against unlawful search and seizure basically encapsulate the concept, but whatever.
brianorca@lemmy.world 10 months ago
The rights in the fourth amendment are generally a limit on the government, not what a third party does when it has a TOS/contract with you allowing it to do things.