SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A federal judge has approved a warrant for web hosting company DreamHost's records for DisruptJ20.org, a site that was used to plan anti-Trump protests on Inauguration Day. However, the scope of the warrant has been significantly narrowed:
"[W]hile the government has the right to execute its Warrant," D.C. Superior Court Judge Robert Morin wrote in his order, "it does not have the right to rummage through the information contained on DreamHost's website and discover the identity of, or access communications by, individuals not participating in alleged criminal activity, particularly those persons who were engaging in protected First Amendment activities."
The government sought the warrant as it gathers evidence for its cases against nearly 200 people charged with rioting on Jan. 20.
The judge's new order instructs DreamHost to redact identifying information of "innocent persons" who visited the website before providing the records to the government. It also dictates a protocol for incorporating procedural safeguards to comply with "First Amendment and Fourth Amendment considerations." Among other stipulations, the government must submit to the court its plan for permanently deleting from its possession all information not within the scope of the warrant.
DreamHost considered the judge's ruling a significant victory. "The new order is a far cry from the original warrant we received in July," DreamHost General Counsel Christopher Ghazarian wrote in a statement to NPR. "Absent a finding by the Court that probable cause of criminal activity exists, the government will not be able to uncover the identities of these users. There are also quite a few modifications that further reduce the government's ability to review unrelated data. This is another huge win not just for DreamHost, but for internet users around the world."
Also at Reason, The Register, Engadget, and Infosecurity Magazine.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 15 2017, @10:18PM (3 children)
Suppose this was a web site mainly used by people who wanted to kill LGBT or blacks or muslims or the democrats in congress. Nobody else seems to use the site. It is mostly, as far as anyone can tell, exclusively used by these people.
Suppose a few of these people were caught actually attempting such crimes. The government now wants to know who else might have been involved. That could be encouragement, helping with the planning, paying for the crimes, or preparing more attacks. The government wants to find them all.
Be sure you'd be happy with this ruling.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Thexalon on Sunday October 15 2017, @11:33PM
This website was used by 200 people accused of committing a crime, plus hundreds of thousands of other people who were doing nothing criminal on the website. The FBI tried to investigate the 99.9% of users who are currently in the eyes of the law completely innocent, as well the 200 people they're supposedly after. In other words, a fishing expedition. And seeing as how the FBI has a long history of treating non-violent left-wing activist types as criminals regardless of whether they are committing crimes, those left-wing activist types have good reason to be fighting against this tooth and nail.
And yes, the same rules limiting warrants to those where a probable cause exists that they committed a crime should apply to, say, The Daily Stormer.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anal Pumpernickel on Sunday October 15 2017, @11:57PM
You're saying I'd be happy if the government violated the Constitution in a supposed attempt to catch some Bad Guys? On what basis do you make this generalization? What evidence are you going to present? I've been 100% opposed to all of the government's constitutional violations, even when they're trying to stop terrorism.
Telling other people what they want is completely idiotic.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DannyB on Monday October 16 2017, @02:52PM
So the ends justify the means.
It seems like I've heard that somewhere before.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.