This should be a lesson to people who don't understand the distinction between "can't" and "won't".<p>If you're running things yourself and control the encryption keys required to access your data, then your service provider <i>can't</i> be compelled to release your data as it's not possible[1][2].<p>If you're delegating all of that to your service provider and they have access to the raw data, then you are putting all your trust in them to protect your data and prevent it's release. And that has to cover everything from hackers, to snooping employees, to the Feds.<p>[1]: <i>Kind of ... I don't recall the Apple/FBI case going to court for a final resolution so it's possible they can compel the service provider to hack you to get the keys but at least they can't get it directly</i>.<p>[2]: <i>And obviously they can always come after you with a court order or rubber hose (or both).</i>
This is a non-issue. The audio Amazon receives is from only-just-barely-before the wakeword up to and through the command or timeout expiration. Yes, it's possible that the defendants cat meowed right before the murder and it sounded like "Alexa". But it seems incredibly unlikely.<p>Prosecutors are just trying to cover every base but the likelihood that this will yield anything is very low.
How is echo audio data substantially different than something like a tape recorder that was live in the man's home? What about a cell phone that was on a call at the time of the alleged murder?<p>I definitely understand wanting to ensure reasonable privacy for users, but to me it feels an awful lot of a stretch to say that the echo is off-limits in this case.
I own an Echo and this is part of the reason it now sits unplugged. To be honest, it doesn't provide enough value for me to consider potentially compromising the privacy of my home.
> Amazon has agreed to hand over data from an Amazon Echo that may have been operating as an alleged murder took place, after the defendant consented.<p>A much more interesting question is if Amazon would have released the data without the defendants conset.
Can you call emergency services via Amazon Echo? I've read on a car forum I'm part of about someone who was working on their vehicle without jack stands and got trapped when their jack slipped. They used Siri to call their wife and jack the car back up. They probably would have died without it.<p>I can easily forsee a future where consumers <i>ask companies</i> for voice assistants that turn on automatically when they detect duress (not needing to say "Alexa ...") before one where governments actually compel product manufacturers to do this.
At this point I assume they have a warrant, so I don't understand what the problem is. People should assume their devices can and will be used against them.
A much more tricky conversation is when a friend of mine discovered that fragments of his a session with his psychologist recorded by his Android Wear watch.
If the defendant consented, couldn't they just log into their own account and get the audio?<p>In the app, you can hear back all the queries you made to Alexa.
I haven't seen a compelling use case for these things yet, including visiting the homes of people who own one. But I sure have seen a lot of deal-breakers.