4 ms·

I'm pretty sure that would have actually been the case here, if Twitter had not initiated litigation themselves. This was a summons, not a warrant or subpoena.

I'm pretty sure that would have actually been the case here, if Twitter had not initiated litigation themselves. This was a summons, not a warrant or subpoena. I believe–but invite correction if wrong–that the summons itself does not have immediate legal force. Ignoring it would require the government to seek a court order, or drop the matter. I'd almost wager that they had already tried, and failed, to get some sort of court order. At the very least, someone, somewhere, did their job–either a judge, or some government lawyer who refused to even try. I wonder if the backstory could be discovered via, for example, a FOIA request? But who knows if getting into the spotlight wouldn't have consequences for this unsung hero. Maybe better not drag some unknown rebel out into the open, lest this all ends with the most ironic way to get fired, ever.

neom 10y ago
Usually, the agent (I've never seen or dealt with DHS/CBP, mostly FBI) just keeps pestering you until you involve lawyers, often they tell you that you cannot involve lawyers (and you involve them anyway) - but you'd be amazed at how persistent they are. Sometimes as you're alluding to, it's a random agent trying a pot shot at seeing if anyone will notice them using some legality they cannot, and mostly they go away when you tell them no. Often it's misapplied MLAT you're dealing with, and then the rest is search without warrant or court order (usually trying to misapply an agency spesific power as you see in this twitter instance). We really cared about doing the right thing by the customer and paid$$ to do so, I'm not sure how many other companies follow that ideal.
- itchyjunk 10y ago
  Is there no accountability for the agent? I can guess the answer.. but it's kind of sad. They keep testing the waters to see what they can get away with. And when they find out, they test the waters to see what more they can get away with.. is what it sounds like from your post.
  - neom 10y ago
    There is not and you are correct. Obviously when you have a business to run it's not like you have the time or resources to go one degree further and try and become enforcement. You shake your head and move on to the next. Sadly, I could have bought 10 senior engineers per year for the cost of legal compliance and policy (around 1.5MM a year).

neom 10y ago

Usually, the agent (I've never seen or dealt with DHS/CBP, mostly FBI) just keeps pestering you until you involve lawyers, often they tell you that you cannot involve lawyers (and you involve them anyway) - but you'd be amazed at how persistent they are. Sometimes as you're alluding to, it's a random agent trying a pot shot at seeing if anyone will notice them using some legality they cannot, and mostly they go away when you tell them no. Often it's misapplied MLAT you're dealing with, and then the rest is search without warrant or court order (usually trying to misapply an agency spesific power as you see in this twitter instance). We really cared about doing the right thing by the customer and paid$$ to do so, I'm not sure how many other companies follow that ideal.

itchyjunk 10y ago
Is there no accountability for the agent? I can guess the answer.. but it's kind of sad. They keep testing the waters to see what they can get away with. And when they find out, they test the waters to see what more they can get away with.. is what it sounds like from your post.
- neom 10y ago
  There is not and you are correct. Obviously when you have a business to run it's not like you have the time or resources to go one degree further and try and become enforcement. You shake your head and move on to the next. Sadly, I could have bought 10 senior engineers per year for the cost of legal compliance and policy (around 1.5MM a year).