[–] 25953691? ago 

Like Google wouldn't voluntarily hand over any dissenters info in a heartbeat without a warrant.

[–] 25951343? 1 point 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

Seems that just like taping a conversation you are part of, if the person who's address was searched, wants to know who searched it when a crime was committed, that should be fine. Sometimes the privacy laws get a little ridiculous. One time I had a phone installed and they forgot to tell me my phone number. So I called the operator and asked what number I was calling from. She said that she could not tell me my own number because it would violate my privacy!

[–] 25951215? ago 

Just say you are doing research for a book. Worked for Pete Townshend when he was caught with child porn.

[–] 25950232? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

https://dontvis.it/https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8826229/Google-providing-police-user-information-simply-based-keyword-searches.html :

2020-10-10 | Google 'is providing police with user information simply based on their keyword searches' | Daily Mail Online

"The publication asked Google to reveal how many 'keyboard warrants' and 'geofence warrants' it has received from investigators since 2017."

'Unsealed court documents reveal that Google has provided police with information on users simply based on their keyword searches - an action that some say could be a violation of US civil rights. ', "Ordinarily, police would have to hone in on an individual suspect before giving Google a warrant that orders them to provide that person's search history - but 'keyword warrants' subvert such a practice.", "CNET reports that investigators 'sent a search warrant to Google that requested information on users who had searched the address of the residence close in time to the arson'.", "According to CNET, there has been a 20 fold increase in the number of 'geofence warrants' served to Google in the past three years alone."


This has been an automated message.