IVR systems are all about staying ahead of the pack, but what happens when the law can’t keep up?

When it comes to the internet, government regulation is tricky. Most laws are outdated at best, and it seems that hackers and the creatively tech-savvy can find a loophole in almost anything.

Now that companies are increasing their internet usage through cloud computing systems, questions of data security and legal rights abound.

Notre Dame Law School’s Hein Timothy M. Nguyen has summed up the problem in his recent paper, “Cloud Cover: Privacy Protections and the Stored Communications Act in the Age of Cloud Computing.”

According to Nguyen, as we move more and more towards a completely internet-driven ecosystem, the government struggles to keep up the pace.

He writes:

Countless industries, both Internet-based and non-Internet-based, rely on and benefit from using the Internet as a market, a service or a forum. It is against this backdrop that the emergence of cloud computing technology takes place…

Cloud computing, or “a collection of [interconnected] computers and servers that are publicly accessible via the internet,” presents huge opportunities for corporate growth and savings, but legal implications are keeping corporate America from whole-heartedly making the switch.

While we in the IVR industry don’t have to worry quite as much about protecting our software secrets from peeping eyes, current tech law isn’t making the grade for other sectors.

It all comes down to the Fourth Amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

In layman’s terms, this means that the police can’t go through my things without a good reason.

Seems fair enough.

The trouble is that the Bill of Rights was drafted way, way before there was even the possibility that some of our possessions would not be physical, but digital.

…Continued in, “Amendment Confusion”…