Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Tuesday August 15 2017, @09:46AM   Printer-friendly
from the just-a-little-info-please dept.

A month ago, the Department of Justice served a warrant (PDF) to Dreamhost regarding one of its clients. This is routine for law enforcement to make such requests, the website hosting service said in a blog post -- except the page in question, disruptj20.org, had helped organize protests of Trump's inauguration. And the DOJ is demanding personal info and 1.3 million IP addresses of visitors to the site.

[...] After questioning the warrant's extreme volume of info requested, the DOJ fired back with a motion (PDF) asking the DC Superior Court to compel the host to comply. Dreamhost's counsel filed legal arguments in opposition (PDF), and will attend a court hearing about the matter in Washington, DC on August 18th.

It's not the first time authorities have tried to pry information from internet companies on users that attended anti-Trump protests.

Source: Engadget

Additional Coverage at The Guardian and DreamHost

Related: Facebook Appeal


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This discussion has been archived.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: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @01:18PM (4 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @01:18PM (#554246)
    Why can't trump just secretly unmask all those people. That's the way we do things here!
    And then use the IRS to harass them. That's ok too.

    But going to the courts and doing it legally? INSANE!
    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   -1  
       Flamebait=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Flamebait' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   -1  
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @01:35PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @01:35PM (#554254)

    Why can't trump just secretly unmask all those people. That's the way we do things here!
    And then use the IRS to harass them. That's ok too.

    Are you stupid? That's not OK, and the majority of left-leaning people familiar with the situation were against it when Obama was president.

    But going to the courts and doing it legally? INSANE!

    The entire point behind the complaint is that the warrant is overbroad, i.e., not legal.

    You seem to be stuck in some kind of stone-age tribalism :/

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @01:48PM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @01:48PM (#554259)
      Suggesting they don't approve of something is vastly different than actually stopping it.
      And nobody stopped it for 8 years.

      So it's a-ok just fine now.
      Weird how past choices have conceuqences today.
      • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Tuesday August 15 2017, @03:18PM

        by Thexalon (636) on Tuesday August 15 2017, @03:18PM (#554276)

        And nobody stopped it

        ... since it started about a century ago. The closest anybody has ever come to stopping federal government surveillance of everybody:
        1. The Church Committee, who in 1975 did a detailed report on the activities of the 3-letter agencies. Nothing came of it after that report, because the Ford administration decided to completely ignore the findings and Congress was unwilling to act against the 3-letter agencies.
        2. The defunding of the "Total Information Awareness" program by Congress in 2003. The Bush administration promptly renamed it to "Terrorism Information Awareness", reshuffled the budget around, and continued exactly like they had before.

        --
        The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @04:45PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @04:45PM (#554314)

        Suggesting they don't approve of something is vastly different than actually stopping it.
        And nobody stopped it for 8 years.

        True. Do you approve of Kim-Jong Un? If not, why didn't you stop him yet?