[keule]

So let's go back to the pre-electrified area.

You send a letter to a friend with sensible information. The letter is transported by the post office from door to door. While in transit, the post office recognizes, from a 3rd party, that a letter exists, that contains sensible information about the post-office's business. Therefore the CEO of that company demands a internal investigation, which searches for a letter with the given senders/recipients address and then opens it.

IANAL, but at least where I come from, there exist laws that acknowledge the intimacy and privacy of these letters and would sentence this behavior.

So why on earth is everyone talking about policy, terms of service, the lack of alternatives a.s.o? Nobody sees the desperate need of legislation here?

[jasonlotito]

> Nobody sees the desperate need of legislation here?

Why do you feel the need to resort to using legislation to eliminate freedoms and rights I currently have?

[keule]

What? I think you did not understand what I meant by that.

Legislation in this case does not eliminate your freedom, but protects it, forcing companies to obey to privacy and data protection.

The only freedom that would be eliminated here is the freedom of a company to abuse data they do not own.

[jasonlotito]

> What? I think you did not understand what I meant by that.

I understand exactly what you mean. You don't, however.

> The only freedom that would be eliminated here is the freedom of a company to abuse data they do not own.

You would also eliminate my ability to agree to the status quo. These are rights I have now. Legislation as you suggest would eliminate that freedom that I have.

You aren't enforcing privacy. You are removing choice and freedom. If anything, your legislation goes so far as to say I'm not allowed to trade my data for a service.

So, why do you feel it's okay to legislate away freedoms I have now?