 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|
 |
|||||||||||
 |
 |
||||||||||||
A question that came to mind this morning: if Federal authorities tried to subpoena a newspaper's subscriber list and all records of newsstand sales for a particular day, would that be considered legit? Would it kick up a storm of "WTFingF?" reactions? Would it be treated as a fairly ordinary event? Or would it be calmly fought in a barrage of motions and countermotions as folks tried to pin down exactly where the line of reasonableness is? (I honestly don't know the answer. I was going to start out by using that question as a rhetorical device, but then I realized that I don't actually know what the response would be if the Washington Post were ordered to turn over the names, addresses, SSNs, and bank account numbers of everyone who'd bought a copy of yesterday's paper or so much as checked the headlines on washingtonpost.com. Clues, please?) The reason I'm wondering:
Is it just me, or does the idea of shipping every single packet by way of the onion router and using anonymized payment methods wherever possible and pseudonymous email accounts, seem just a bit more reasonable than it did a week ago? Maybe not because I expect my own government to find anything they'd bother to use against me in this kind of fishing expedition, but just to frustrate such attempts in the future (uh, assuming a large majority of other Internet users adopted the same habits, that is). Maybe all of this will look very different to me after I've slept (or after my body finally vanquishes this damned virus and I can breathe properly again). Or maybe not. At the moment I'm finding the idea of serving a news site such a broad subpoena somewhat disconcerting. I should probably disclose that I haven't read that PDF yet and am going on the description of it at the site I linked to. Post a comment in response: |
| © 2002-2008. Blurty Journal. All rights reserved. |