Comment on Google forced to reveal users' search histories in Colorado court ruling

• Sentau@feddit.de ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  But Google didn’t. They were forced by a warrant which was issued on grounds so weak, that judges themselves agreed that it was unconstitutional.

  source

  • tsonfeir@lemm.ee ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    There was a fire and maybe people who looked up that address could be further investigated.

    Do you think that’s weak grounds? How could that specific and very small list of IP addresses violate a persons privacy?

    I obviously haven’t read the warrant request, and it could have been worded pretty poorly.

    source

    • Sentau@feddit.de ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Yes I think that’s weak grounds. And so do the judge who proceeded over the case as well as several other judges who deemed the warrant as unconstitutional. The only reason the evidence was allowed was because the judge declared that the justice systems broke the rules in good faith. I haven’t read the warrant request either just forming my opinion from articles on the issue.

      I think that the warrant was issued on weak grounds because what the cops had was a hunch (a calculated one but still a hunch). They had no proof that the perpetrators/murderers searched for the apartment. It is not like they identified that searches for that addressed spiked at some point and served a warrant for those ip addresses. They just asked for all ip addresses in the last 15 days because they did not have evidence pointing towards a search just a calculated hunch.

      source