Home Computers Connected to the Internet Aren't Private, Court Rules
eweek.com
eweek.com
"(...) the court FINDS that any such subjective expectation of privacy—if one even existed in this case—is not objectively reasonable."
Some days are more dystopian than others.
Also, see the EFF statement: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/06/federal-court-fourth-a...
There is then no intellectual property more so, because anyone can crack DRM.
I like this ruling. It is delicious dumb precedent.
Also it would imply that you needed a licenced for public screening of any content played on a PC connected to the Internet.
But the problem is that most home computers connected to the Internet are in fact not private. Sure, the defendant in this case was using Tor. But the fact that NIT pwned him tells me that he was working in Windows. Probably with just Tor browser. And obviously not with any protection against non-Tor Internet connectivity. The Tor Project ought to warn users about these issues.
Privacy policies?
Could this be used as a defense for an attacker?
More generally, the ruling seems inconsistent with CFFA. So websites could freely compromise users, even more than they already do. And perhaps vice versa. Although there's arguably a distinction between home computers and commercial ones.