3 ms·

There is no obvious reason why a company should have an ethical obligation to resist lawfully issued warrants. Then who will? Think about it: companies are th

There is no obvious reason why a company should have an ethical obligation to resist lawfully issued warrants. Then who will? Think about it: companies are the only entity who can challenge this kind of behavior in courts. But that wouldn't have driven as many clicks. Nice ad hom, but it's mistaken. Arrington is many things, but he actually feels the way he writes.

jmillikin 13y ago
>> There is no obvious reason why a company should have >> an ethical obligation to resist lawfully issued warrants. > > Then who will? Think about it: companies are the only > entity who can challenge this kind of behavior in courts. The concept of search warrants is built into the constitution, and is supported by countless judicial decisions. Challenging the ability for the government to demand customer data would take much more than a few tech companies.
saalweachter 13y ago
Courts have proven that they are a lousy place to change national security policy. Courts established the principle of keeping things secret for the sake of national security (even though it later turned out that the case establishing this had nothing to do with national security; the gov't just claimed it did to avoid liability for negligence). Whenever someone tries to challenge secret, warrantless infringements of privacy, the courts throw out the case as lacking jurisdiction: since no one can publicly acknowledge that you are being spied on, you can't sue the government for spying on you. The only way to change the policy on this is in Congress. If you really want to make a difference, call your Congressman and yell at them for spying on you. Call them daily, call your Senator, call other people's Congressmen. It still might not help, but nothing Google or Twitter or Facebook can do is going to.

3 ms·

There is no obvious reason why a company should have an ethical obligation to resist lawfully issued warrants. Then who will? Think about it: companies are th

by sillysaurus 13y ago

jmillikin 13y ago
>> There is no obvious reason why a company should have >> an ethical obligation to resist lawfully issued warrants. > > Then who will? Think about it: companies are the only > entity who can challenge this kind of behavior in courts. The concept of search warrants is built into the constitution, and is supported by countless judicial decisions. Challenging the ability for the government to demand customer data would take much more than a few tech companies.
saalweachter 13y ago
Courts have proven that they are a lousy place to change national security policy. Courts established the principle of keeping things secret for the sake of national security (even though it later turned out that the case establishing this had nothing to do with national security; the gov't just claimed it did to avoid liability for negligence). Whenever someone tries to challenge secret, warrantless infringements of privacy, the courts throw out the case as lacking jurisdiction: since no one can publicly acknowledge that you are being spied on, you can't sue the government for spying on you. The only way to change the policy on this is in Congress. If you really want to make a difference, call your Congressman and yell at them for spying on you. Call them daily, call your Senator, call other people's Congressmen. It still might not help, but nothing Google or Twitter or Facebook can do is going to.