Hacker News Reader

As long as there's an archive of the prosecutor's records, they're either public records (as most government records are, by default), or they're exempt, but the prosecutor already had access to them, and no interest is served in demanding their destruction. This isn't proprietary source code, and it isn't proprietary financial information.

View on HN

"FBI wiretap transcripts" sound like very private conversations, probably including innocent people and innocent topics. Just because they had a court order for the wiretap doesn't mean the conversations are now public record. So they are exempt, but then it's still private and not something that you should be taking home.

> prosecutor already had access to them

I don't think that argument works. The same could be said for a software engineer. He had access to the source code, so why can't he keep a copy of it?

Because it has commercial value, and the engineer would be misappropriating it. Anyways, I don't much care beyond "the situations are not really comparable".

They seem comparable. Similarly, employee HR records also aren't source code or financial information, but you still wouldn't want copies in your former HR team members' houses.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com