From a legal perspective, this is a common game of cat and mouse law enforcement regularly uses to circumvent the 4th amendment prohibition on unreasonable sear

From a legal perspective, this is a common game of cat and mouse law enforcement regularly uses to circumvent the 4th amendment prohibition on unreasonable search and seizures without a warrant. In other words if law enforcement illegally obtains evidence, that evidence can be suppressed and all evidence as a result (fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine). But the 4th amendment only applies to the government, so a non government actor can otherwise illegally obtain evidence (break in to your home and steal said evidence and turn it over to law enforcement) and you would not be able to suppress the evidence because the government didn’t violate your 4th amendment rights, another private citizen did. In this case you get entities arguing geek squad is the government/acting on behalf the government, presumably because they took some small payments, on the other hand you have the governments arguement that geek squad is not acting on behalf of the government and in fact the criminals signed a contract allowing geek squad to search and seize evidence of a crime from the computers. It’s a well settled area of law, but it’s controversial.