Should Skype wiretaps be admissible in courts? Should any?

VoIP Now makes an interesting talking point in response to the recent announcement that the Swiss may start listening in on VoIP calls. The article questions whether VoIP wiretaps should be admissible in courts since it's possible to doctor the audio.

That's a valid point, but the scope here is larger than just VoIP. The same could be said for other types of voice, as well as photos and videos. An eight year old can photoshop an incriminating image in a matter of minutes. Video editing has become so sophisticated that video surveillance could theoretically be doctored too. Even the example given, a spoof of U2's Sunday, Bloody Sunday being sung by President Bush on YouTube, was pieced together from non-VoIP audio. Still, all these types of surveillance remain valid forms of evidence (except in Britain, where the courts forbid wiretaps for fear of putting informants at risk).

My advice? Hire a good lawyer who can get you off the hook no matter how much "evidence" there is against you.

Categories: World, Security, VoIP, Skype