Is the mobile phone primarily a tool for committing crime?

Over at Nokia Conversations, they have a couple interesting points about past legal decisions and recent government interventions into the regulation of mobile phones. The mobile phone is the instrument of communication for the twenty-first century and if people want to enjoy the freedoms they are accustomed to, they should keep an eye on these developments.  The two conversations are interesting in that the success of one could really serve to mitigate the other.

I think Skype's efforts in trying to get networks to open up the applications they allow -essentially turning the networks into pipes on which voice/data flow freely- is commendable. The efforts, mind you, but not the application. Skype is fine, but I find it a bit hypocritical that a company with a proprietary standard for doing voice over IP is the major player to push for this. There are open standards such as SIP that can be used -and, being open- they can be examined by the community and network operators to verify that they do not pose harm. There is some fear that Skype has or may at some time place backdoors in its software and/or network that allow it to snoop on its users.

As to the anonymity issue, I think this is something we will see more and more by the mere fact that many people that buy pre-paid plans with cash, leaving no trail do so with an intent to commit a crime. This does not mean I think it means government should outlaw this practice, just that I think it likely that they will. And who is going to vote against it?

However, there is some bright light. If Skype is successful in forcing/convincing networks to open up their services, this could allow a legion of new applications to come in and solve the privacy problem, if not the anonymity one.  Callers could encrypt their conversation starting at their phone and ending at the person they are calling so that neither the network nor the government could listen in on the conversation.  And, so far as they are in a place where one could reasonably expect privacy in their conversation, the government would have to face the usual, higher standards of phone-tapping to listen to the conversation, and it would be one-sided at that!
...Read more