Not exact matches
Police investigating computer
hacking by private investigators commissioned by national newspapers have uncovered evidence that
emails sent and received by Gordon Brown during his time as Chancellor were
illegally accessed.
Let's review... The
hacked emails look bad, but they were obtained
illegally and were never meant for public consumption - these
emails were never «peer reviewed» so to speak.
You claim claim that the
illegally hacked and published CRU
emails demonstrated proof of fraud.
Private
emails between two or more parties: These are sent and delivered between personal
email accounts such as those set up for individuals and private businesses on services like Google and Yahoo! You know, like the personal accounts that former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin utilized last year that were
illegally hacked.
In late November 2009... a crime was committed in which thousands of
emails of prominent climate scientists were
illegally obtained from a server at the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom... The short answer is that the
hacked emails do not undermine the science in any way [emphasis added].
Bartnicki v. Vopper establishes that even if information was obtained
illegally (e.g.
hacking email), if the publisher does not know it was
illegally obtained, they are not liable.