Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 115 posts

Re: Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website

#41

Post by tptacek »

twoquestions wrote: post #11

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."

Wait, don't the police get similar information dumps from similar fact patterns kind of routinely? I know they can't properly use dragnet searches as a starting point for an investigation, but if they have a reasonably specific criminal inquiry they're pursuing, can't they get their hands on a lot of stuff?

I'm not sure the fact pattern you're providing really illustrates the concern.

Rather, I think the concern is that the prosecutors have what appears to be a very diffuse criminal inquiry, and that the specific information they're looking for has a clear side-effect of intimidating lawful protesters. The concern is that the "investigation" is a pretense for intimidation.

You can't say that about the police investigating bar patrons for a specific car theft or whatever.

Re: Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website

#42

Post by ptero »

andy_ppp wrote: post #4

This 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 :-(

While I am strongly opposed to this warrant as being ridiculously too broad, I think you are off the mark.

The government is not investigating those who hurt Trump's feelings (does he have any? sorry :) ). It is the law enforcement that is going after violent rioters whatever their political views are. I hope it does and keeps doing it every time there is a violent riot.

To me, the problem is in trying to grab a lot of private information in the hopes of easily finding leads. Instead they should focus on other sources: I suspect DC has all sorts of video monitors and was swarming with agents during the inauguration. Cannot this serve as the source of leads? Maybe cops can walk around some more and talk to people? I doubt a crowd can riot without leaving traces to the identities of a number of rioters. My 2c.

Re: Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website

#43

Post by AnkleInsurance »

andy_ppp wrote: post #23
treerock wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. I think you are reading that incorrectly.

Okay, sure, care to edit your comment and explain how?

Not parent, but:

This is a federal search warrant pertaining to an ongoing investigation, not a facility that Trump organized to hunt nonbelievers, as much as you want that to be true so that your narrative can play itself out.

Re: Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website

#44

Post by spaceribs »

xienze wrote: post #25

Pretend we're talking about Daily Stormer and Charlottesville and I bet you'd see things differently.

No, not at all, not even close.

Was the Daily Stormer's visitor logs up for grabs at any point? Did GoDaddy/Google hand over data to the government as a matter of public record? No.

What about visitor data for any alt-right or white supremacist sites being requested by the government? Maybe in association with a possible hate crime investigation, but nothing I've heard about recently.

What kind of muddying logic are you trying to communicate here, or is this just trolling?

Re: Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website

#45

Post by jrowley »

CalChris wrote: post #35
xienze wrote: post #25

Pretend we're talking about Daily Stormer and Charlottesville and I bet you'd see things differently.

You can pretend all you want about something that didn't happen. That is a counterfactual: a conditional statement the first clause of which expresses something contrary to fact, as “If I had known.”. There have been no judicial orders requiring the Daily Stormer to turn over any records relating to Charlottesville. Instead, quite the apposite , various private companies have decided that having anything to do with t…

Wouldn't it be amazing if the providers released the IP addresses of the the Daily Stormer users, just because they can. That would be interesting, and totally within their power.

Re: Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website

#46

Post by c3534l »

koolba wrote: post #3

> 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?

The whole point of the 4th amendment is you have to figure out what you're looking for first, then request and get permission to only that specific thing. The 4th amendment bans blanket "looking for something fishy" searches. You're supposed to be forced to justify each individual person's rights you're violating as necessary for the investigation of the crime. In other words, this is the textbook scenario the Bill of Rights is meant to prevent.

Re: Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website

#47

Post by sseveran »

jakebasile wrote: post #8

There'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 think this horse left the barn a long time ago. At least they are actually going to court and not doing something like use the NSAs database and then utilize some parallel construction technology technique to lie in court about how they discovered the alleged wrong doing. This is hardly the first time a court has granted the serving of an overly broad warrant. I would like to say that we could put this horse back in the barn but I think the previous administration made it clear that there is no political will in the US to do so.

Re: Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website

#48

Post by spaceribs »

0xbear wrote: post #39
williamscales wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Yes Mr. Bar Owner, a few of your patrons incited a racist mob a few weeks back. We'll need the names and addresses of all the people who visited this place for the last year please." Nope, I still feel the same. It's going too far.

Pretend further that an angry mob at work would get you fired if they don't like your stance on this issue.

Pretend they have first amendment rights to tell you to your face and through their actions that your opinion is garbage and not something they respect.

*adding: I find it amazing some people are up in arms about people getting fired for their opinions, maybe you should direct your anger to "Right to Work" laws anti-union folks have pushed down our throats everywhere?

There used to be a due process before someone was fired, I wonder where that went and who took it away?

Re: Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website

#49

Post by krapp »

koolba wrote: post #3

> 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?

>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?

Even accepting that premise, which I don't, there doesn't always need to be an alternative. The 4th Amendment appears to require far more specificity than this request allows. Political assembly and protests are obviously protected by the Constitution, and these 200 rioters are considered innocent until proven guilty.

If law enforcement can't get a valid warrant then they should lose. They can go home and polish their batons.

/IANAL

Re: Judge orders tech company to release Web user data from anti-Trump website

#50

Post by simonh »

xienze wrote: post #25

Pretend we're talking about Daily Stormer and Charlottesville and I bet you'd see things differently.

Nope. Violent islamic extremists are just as odious as violent facist extremists, yet the consensus here was to support Apple's position on the security of private communications.
Post reply on HN