It seems that the state of Texas decided it was a great idea to send a letter to computer repair shops telling them they might be violating the law and need a Private Investigator Licenses and that they will have to shut down while they spend 3 years getting their PI Licenses.
So the Geek Squad needs a PI license to work at BestBuy and repair computers. Good Idea.
Computer Repair shops are filing lawsuits again the PI Board in Texas. See articles here
There now is a video news program to go with the articles. See this video for the insane PI laws.
Under the rubric of concern for so-called public safety, they first push for seemingly modest changes in the law. Then, with the change in place, they push for aggressive and broad interpretations of the law to push competitors out of the marketplace.
By forcing computer repair shops out of the data analysis market, private investigators want to force Texas consumers to use PIs for even basic computer questions such as "how was my computer used and by whom?"
This law was not passed in response to a public epidemic of rogue computer repair shops ripping off their customers. It was passed, quietly and behind the scenes, at the behest of private investigators looking to use government to quash competition.
Texas courts should examine laws like this to determine whether they constitute a legitimate exercise of the government’s police power. When, as here, the laws cannot be justified, our courts should strike them down.
In so many industries across our state, government-enforced cartels are limiting competition, driving up prices and reducing to quality of service.
It is time entrepreneurs and consumers questioned this awesome and nearly unbridled power of government to interfere with our daily life, and that is what the Institute for Justice Texas Chapter intends to do.
http//
News State June 25, 2008
http//
When Geek Squad Becomes Geek Posse
The state of Texas is trying to make the tech who saves your lost computer files become a licensed private investigator. No, we're not kidding.
Blame House Bill 2833, nominally authored by committee chair Rep. Joe Driver, R-Garland, which came through the House Law Enforcement Committee last session. The law says that anyone "obtaining or furnishing information [including] information obtained or furnished through the review and analysis of, and the investigation into the content of, computer-based data not available to the public" must be licensed by the Texas Department of Public Safety Private Security Board. Before it passed, there was lots of testimony from bodies like the Texas Association of Licensed Investigators and the Texas Association of Locksmiths, but none from computer repair firms.
Now it's coming down to a fight between the PI community, which is claiming that anyone who does a computer repair or data retrieval needs to be a licensed investigator because of privacy and fraud concerns, and the computer repair community, which is pretty much saying that's the dumbest thing they've ever heard. So the Institute for Justice is suing the state on the behalf of local computer repair firms and computer owners who can't work out why the state thinks every guy with a soldering iron has to be Magnum P.I. now.
While that is some interesting information Scott, I have to question what it is you do here. After noticing that you spammed this post twice, I did a forum search and saw that you have posted in the past about similar things, but I find it more than curious that you have subsequently gone back to those threads and edited them all to delete everything you posted. What's your deal?
While that is some interesting information Scott, I have to question what it is you do here. After noticing that you spammed this post twice, I did a forum search and saw that you have posted in the past about similar things, but I find it more than curious that you have subsequently gone back to those threads and edited them all to delete everything you posted. What's your deal?
Why exactly do you think this is spam?? I predicted two years ago this would happen if you computer forensic people do not get off you A$$ and get involved and do something about this. If you look and google my name you will find I have been a big opponent of this law for years now. In the posts where I posted original names about who was behind the laws I had to go back and edit them due to the fact that some people attacked me legally for my first amendment freedoms. If you don't care about the laws and that you have to be a pi and that the PI board is making it a monopoly to eliminate your jobs now not only for forensics, but also for computer repair, well then I guess that is your choice, but I for one think it is a shame someone can make my job illegal and I do not appreciate the ability for a board to pass a law that is only to eliminate competition because we do not have someone lobbying on behalf of computer forensics.
I don't think there is one person besides yourself that thinks this is spam. Spam is for solicitation. My goal is to inform people that they are losing their right to work and I am trying to raise awareness. Where exactly do you think I benefit?
I just encountered the same thing in South Carolina. It seems that in order to image (or otherwise acquire evidence), you need to have a PI license, which costs $350/yr and requires continuing education, a $10,000 bond and other niceities.
You DON'T need the license to do forensic analysis, prepare a report or testify in state court.
Now, I can understand the notion that for South Carolina jurisdictions, you need to be acquainted with the jurisdictional rules of evidence. Certainly the states are, for the most part, far behind the Federal Government in having a coherent and consistent rules of evidence.
But the law was written by a lawyer and, coincidentally, exempts lawyers from compliance. Ok, so lawyers licensed in the state should know the rules of evidence for that state.
The problem that I have is that there are no national standards, no nationally accredited credentialling organizations (yet), and no reciprocity with most states. Plus, the nature of these investigations is that they can take place across state lines. For example, I can use enterprise versions of EnCase or FTK or combine these with other technologies to do my entire investigation over the Internet.
Thus, while the state has the right to license practices in that state, do they have the right to interfere with interstate commerce? In most cases (except marriage), the answer is NO!
While most locally licensed PIs will know the local rules of evidence are they, simply by their licensure, qualified to do a forensic acquisition? And since the local rules of evidence are often far less stringent than the Federal rules, can we not make the claim that if we follow the Federal rules, we'll almost certainly be in compliance with any local rules?
I agree that this is an important issue worthy of discussion and that if we don't act, as a profession, to establish our own method of accreditation, similar to the AMA or the ABA, we're likely to find ourselves frustrated by a myriad of local laws and rules which change from place to place.
In the age of electronic commerce, such laws if poorly crafted, represent restraint of trade and the best place to stop them is before they are enacted.
I'm not going to argue the merits of the post, I belive I mentioned that it was an interesting post. By "spamming" I was referring to the fact that you posted the same thing using two different titles (The other one titled "Geek Squad has to get PI License to repair computer in Texas". which I see is gone now). Also I mentioned it was curious why you methodically edited all your prior posts on this forum and wondered why. I don't really know why you tried to make it sound like I attacked the issue of the topic unless you were sidestepping my observations? I don't really care to tell you the truth, was a whim when I asked.
The topic in this thread does have merit and I am reading with interest.
Even thought I'm safe (for now) I'm following the Texas thing closely. Here, via Slashdot is a good round-up of the current state (pun intended).
http//