Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

DOJ Demands Info on 1.3M Visitors to Protest-Organizing Website

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

AnonTechie writes:

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This discussion has been archived.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.
DOJ Demands Info on 1.3M Visitors to Protest-Organizing Website | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 46 comments | Search Discussion
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: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @04:43PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 15 2017, @04:43PM (#554313)

    Information that is not specified in the seizure but is disclosed nonetheless is specifically inadmissible in court.

    Inadmissible in court, but the government will still have it. Do you really see no problem with that?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 16 2017, @08:49AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 16 2017, @08:49AM (#554613)

    Inadmissible in court, but the government will still have it. Do you really see no problem with that?

    So? What are they going to do with it, build cases via parallel construction? Oh, wait a second ...

    Honestly, there will probably be more harassment, intimidation and the finding of unrelated activities & "crimes" than there will be parallel construction.