[klodolph]

The opposite safeguards exist in some states. In at least CA and SC, computer technicians are mandatory reporters.

I don't think the analogy between lawyers and computer techs really works. I could make another analogy here--it's like taking your car to a mechanic and there's a bunch of blood in the trunk, so the mechanic calls the cops, and it turns out you murdered someone. My analogy doesn't completely work, and I think there are other grounds why the FBI's actions here might not be legal, but computer techs are not sacred.

[michaelmrose]

Argument by analogy is a worthless pursuit every time you think of doing it please take a deep breath and think of a more honest useful argument.

Your car doesn't contain a full copy of most of the pertinent private information about your life and a copy of every private conversation for the last decade. Everything from your taxes to what kind of sex you enjoy.

Furthermore the blood would be evident just by casual examination whereas this suggests a fishing expedition.

Furthermore the mechanic would just be a good Samaritan rather than a paid agent of the government.

The relationship herein creates legal issues and a perverse incentive. Your repair tech shouldn't be acting as a government agent, shouldn't be paid for finding dirt on you, shouldn't be fishing, and shouldn't be the judge of what constitutes illegality especially when guessing wrong ruins someone's life.

[klodolph]

I think this might be a response to some other comment, or perhaps a straw version of my comment, since I agree with basically everything you've written, especially the part about analogies.

[jMyles]

The analogy is fatally flawed because, as GP points out, it's trivial to copy illicit material onto the medium in question. You can't copy blood, and I don't see how you can find and plant blood of a known murder victim.

[klodolph]

I don't think that's really a fatal flaw. I mean, the mechanic could have killed someone, put the body in the trunk of your car while it was in the shop, and then disposed of the body elsewhere. The legal system is designed to handle cases that aren't exactly "open and shut" and there's a balance to be had between protecting against possibly tainted evidence and being able to bring criminals to justice.

Just copying child porn onto somebody's computer shouldn't be enough to convict them, and if its is, then the problem is with the legal system elsewhere, not with the system of mandatory reporters.