Find solution
Educating the public on this subject?

If I access personal email through an app on a public university owned device is my email now subject to public records requests?

  • This is an issue I have been discussing with IT folks and librarians from public universities and there is no consensus so far.

  • Answer:

    In California, the Public Records act specifies that any records related to the conduct of government should be made available. Then it makes a large number of exceptions. Of interest is 6254c which seems to suggest that personal email about non-governmental business would not be in scope for this law. 6254.  Except as provided in Sections 6254.7 and 6254.13, nothing in this chapter shall be construed to require disclosure of records that are any of the following:    (a) Preliminary drafts, notes, or interagency or intra-agency memoranda that are not retained by the public agency in the ordinary course of business, if the public interest in withholding those records clearly outweighs the public interest in disclosure.    (b) Records pertaining to pending litigation to which the public agency is a party, or to claims made pursuant to Division 3.6 (commencing with Section 810), until the pending litigation or claim has been finally adjudicated or otherwise settled.    (c) Personnel, medical, or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. I think anyone would have a hard time making the case that your personal mail is a public record. But if you are concerned about it, do not store your data on the publicly owned system,. What do the people who you have talked to say?

Jack Dahlgren at Quora Visit the source

Was this solution helpful to you?

Other answers

According to the Supreme Court Case of Ontario v. Quon et al, maybe Facts of the Case Employees of the Ontario police department filed claim against the police department alleging Fourth Amendment violations in relation to the department's review of text messages made on a city issued pagers. The district court found in favor of the city.  The Ninth Circuit reversed holding that employees had a reasonable expectation of privacy.  The court noted the department's review of the text messages was unreasonable because it could have used "less intrusive methods". Decision: The Supreme Court held 9 – 0 for the City of Ontario.  The city did not violate its employees' Fourth Amendment rights because the search of Mr. Quon's text messages was reasonable. Even assuming Mr. Quon had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the city's search was reasonable because it was motivated by a legitimate work related purpose and was not excessive in scope.

Glenn Watson

Related Q & A:

Just Added Q & A:

Find solution

For every problem there is a solution! Proved by Solucija.

  • Got an issue and looking for advice?

  • Ask Solucija to search every corner of the Web for help.

  • Get workable solutions and helpful tips in a moment.

Just ask Solucija about an issue you face and immediately get a list of ready solutions, answers and tips from other Internet users. We always provide the most suitable and complete answer to your question at the top, along with a few good alternatives below.