Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Sunday October 25 2015, @02:07PM   Printer-friendly
from the prove-it! dept.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/10/judge-tosses-wikimedias-anti-nsa-lawsuit-because-wikipedia-isnt-big-enough/

On Friday, a federal judge dismissed an anti-surveillance lawsuit brought by Wikimedia, ruling in favor of the National Security Agency.

In his 30 page ruling, US District Judge T.S. Ellis III found that Wikimedia and the other plaintiffs had no standing, and could not prove that they had been surveilled, largely echoing the previous 2013 Supreme Court decision in the case of Clapper v. Amnesty International .

Judge Ellis found that there is no way to definitively know if Wikimedia, which publishes Wikipedia, one of the largest sites on the Internet, is being watched.

As he wrote in his memorandum opinion:

Plaintiffs' argument is unpersuasive, as the statistical analysis on which the argument rests is incomplete and riddled with assumptions. For one thing, plaintiffs insist that Wikipedia's over one trillion annual Internet communications is significant in volume. But plaintiffs provide no context for assessing the significance of this figure. One trillion is plainly a large number, but size is always relative. For example, one trillion dollars are of enormous value, whereas one trillion grains of sand are but a small patch of beach.

...

As already discussed, although plaintiffs have alleged facts that plausibly establish that the NSA uses Upstream surveillance at some number of chokepoints, they have not alleged facts that plausibly establish that the NSA is using Upstream surveillance to copy all or substantially all communications passing through those chokepoints. In this regard, plaintiffs can only speculate, which Clapper forecloses as a basis for standing.

Since the June 2013 Snowden revelations, by and large, it has been difficult for legal challenges filed against government surveillance to advance in the courts.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Sunday October 25 2015, @02:42PM

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday October 25 2015, @02:42PM (#254345) Journal

    Congress needs to put a stop to this nonsense. Congress has authority to over ride all the secret courts, as well as the public court rulings. Just put a stop to it. Unfortunately - that ain't happening.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Funny=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Funny' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by isostatic on Sunday October 25 2015, @03:31PM

    by isostatic (365) on Sunday October 25 2015, @03:31PM (#254360) Journal

    Congress are a bit like security theatre, completely ineffectual and aimed in the wrong direction

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by Hyperturtle on Sunday October 25 2015, @03:55PM

      by Hyperturtle (2824) on Sunday October 25 2015, @03:55PM (#254364)

      Yeah... congress is not going to put a stop to anything.

      They can't even permit themselves to lead, let alone put an end to a rule.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by maxwell demon on Sunday October 25 2015, @09:30PM

    by maxwell demon (1608) on Sunday October 25 2015, @09:30PM (#254439) Journal

    How many dirty secrets does the NSA know about members of congress?

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 26 2015, @07:15AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 26 2015, @07:15AM (#254561)

      How many dirty politicians would support politicians they have no dirt/leverage on? :p