How did this travesty pass 4th Amendment muster?
"Yes Mr. Bar Owner, a few of your patrons stole a car a few weeks back. We'll need the names and addresses of all the people who visited this place for the last year please."
Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website
11–20 of 115 posts
Re: Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website
#12There's lots of disturbing internet precedents being set in the last few weeks, both legal and corporate policy. I try not to be hyperbolic but I really am beginning to worry about the future of freedom of expression and association on the net.
I don't think its hyperbole. This is deeply concerning. We're entering a new era of authoritarianism.
Re: Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website
#13> Prosecutors John Borchert and Jennifer Kerkhoff argued that their request had to be somewhat broad because they have no idea who was associated with the rioting through the website until they review the data. For people who think this is wrong, assuming you accept the premise that they should be investigating rioters, what alternative is there to find out who they are?
> what alternative is there to find out who they are?
Whether there is an answer to that or not is irrelevant to the fact the warrant lacks specificity.
Same bullshit was used in the Kim dotcom debacle irrc.
"We're not sure what he's done wrong, but we know hes a bad guy so get every computer and we'll build a case based on what we find."
To give you an example of how stupid this warrant is, and funnily enough answer your question: it's akin to the police confiscating every computer and phone within a 10 mile radius of the riots to check the internet history.
Re: Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website
#14> Prosecutors John Borchert and Jennifer Kerkhoff argued that their request had to be somewhat broad because they have no idea who was associated with the rioting through the website until they review the data. For people who think this is wrong, assuming you accept the premise that they should be investigating rioters, what alternative is there to find out who they are?
This is the same justification people give for torture. The fact that you can't come up with another way to get information doesn't automatically justify the means you can come up with.
Re: Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website
#15This is terrifying; am I reading it correctly that the government is, on behalf of the President, going after people who have opposed him and is starting a register maybe of those persons who hurt the feelings of the glorious leader? I wonder how far down the rabbit hole we are going :-(
It can't happen here.
Re: Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website
#16> Prosecutors John Borchert and Jennifer Kerkhoff argued that their request had to be somewhat broad because they have no idea who was associated with the rioting through the website until they review the data. For people who think this is wrong, assuming you accept the premise that they should be investigating rioters, what alternative is there to find out who they are?
Once you cast a wide net like this, the arguments against casting an even wider net are weakened through precedent.
Re: Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website
#17This is terrifying; am I reading it correctly that the government is, on behalf of the President, going after people who have opposed him and is starting a register maybe of those persons who hurt the feelings of the glorious leader? I wonder how far down the rabbit hole we are going :-(
No. I think you are reading that incorrectly.
Re: Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website
#18This is absolutely insane. I hope this eventually reaches an appeals court that understands the 4th amendment.
Re: Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website
#19> Prosecutors John Borchert and Jennifer Kerkhoff argued that their request had to be somewhat broad because they have no idea who was associated with the rioting through the website until they review the data. For people who think this is wrong, assuming you accept the premise that they should be investigating rioters, what alternative is there to find out who they are?
If we accept that premise (which seems to be the most controversial aspect of this case), and accept that the prosecution need unilateral access to all database records, then the judge's restricted timeframe fits as part of a good ruling. Also sealing any extraneous information is a good step.
However, there is still something lacking.
Setting a precedent here is important, and if the past is a guide, the precedent would be abused.
The only thing I can think of to discourage future wide-reaching warrants of this kind, is compensation.
For every individual who has their rights violated, in the pursuit of others, compensation is usually able to be granted, in most cases.
So, tie it to this case.
Such a wide-reaching warrant may be granted in difficult circumstances, if every individual whose privacy is ignored, and has no guilt in the investigated matter, are immediately granted compensation.
It doesn't even have to be much, because the cost of such a warrant would scale with the number of people they are ignoring.
Disclaimer: No longer a lawyer. No experience in US law.
Re: Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website
#20Note to self: purge records. Religiously. You can't hand over what you don't have.
These records only exist because there was a previous court order to start taking them.