3 ms·
They should be required when asking for something to state whether it is a lawful order or a request. But the real problem is that the government would lie any
by brokenmachine 10y ago
They should be required when asking for something to state whether it is a lawful order or a request.
But the real problem is that the government would lie anyway and can't be trusted. It's sad that our "protectors" have become so corrupt and dishonorable.
Oh, also there should be real consequences when agencies are caught lying or being dishonorable. I can dream, right?
- ipsin 10y agoThe problem with the "lawful order or request" split is that, even if they make it very clear, there's the implicit threat of escalation if you don't agree. Today you refuse a request. Maybe tomorrow they convince a judge to let them very publicly come to your offices to take the data. I suspect that fear drives many people and companies to cooperate, even if they understand that there's a choice.
- EGreg 10y agoThey can convincea judge to do that anyway, if it was a lawful request.
- brokenmachine 10y agoExactly. I believe the next step after a request would not be a search warrant, it would be a warrant for the data lawfully requested. A company would not be able to refuse such a lawful request. IANAL though, so what do I know.