Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Courts Communications Crime Government Network Privacy Republicans The Internet United States Technology

Justice Department Walks Back Demand For Information On Anti-Trump Website (theverge.com) 130

After issuing a warrant to DreamHost for "all files" related to an anti-trump website, the Justice Department says it's scaling back a demand for information from hosting service DreamHost. The Verge reports: In a legal filing today, the Justice Department argues that the warrant was proper, but also says DreamHost has since brought up information that was previously "unknown." In light of that, it has offered to carve out information demanded in the warrant, specifically pledging to not request information like HTTP logs tied to IP addresses. The department says it is only looking for information related to criminal activity on the site, and says that "the government is focused on the use of the Website to organize, to plan, and to effect a criminal act -- that is, a riot." Peaceful protestors, the government argues, are not the targets of the warrant. The filing asks the court to proceed with the new, less burdensome request, which, apart from the carved-out sections, still requests "all records or other information, pertaining to the Account, including all files, databases, and database records stored by DreamHost in relation to that Account." It's unclear if DreamHost will continue to fight the new demand.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Justice Department Walks Back Demand For Information On Anti-Trump Website

Comments Filter:
  • Privacy and free speech only apply to people who support the president.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      People who support the President would share everything with him anyway, their hearts, their minds, their wallets.

      Truly they care the best of us.

    • Re: This is fine (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Clearly not. Many who supported Trump are shut down from speaking out in public, disinvented to speak in public places paid for with tax dollars, violently attacked when gathering in a public place, had their private information released to the general public... in what way are Trump supporters getting special protection here?

      I don't agree with them or their choice for president, but I'd have to say if this was happening to Clinton supporters there would be major outrage. I know I'd be rather pissed off

      • Re: This is fine (Score:4, Insightful)

        by MightyMartian ( 840721 ) on Tuesday August 22, 2017 @07:23PM (#55066869) Journal

        You have the right to free speech and privacy. But if you make your views known publicly, you can't assume you'll somehow magically be immune from the consequences. Want to be a Nazi in your basement, go right ahead. Want to be a Nazi out in the town square, then you have voluntarily surrendered your rights to privacy, and if your friends, family and employer no longer want to be associated with you because you believe the white race is superior and all the Jews and brown skinned people should be chased off, well, that's tough on you.

        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by Anonymous Coward

          You have the right to free speech and privacy. But if you make your views known publicly, you can't assume you'll somehow magically be immune from the consequences. Want to be a Nazi in your basement, go right ahead. Want to be a Nazi out in the town square, then you have voluntarily surrendered your rights to privacy, and if your friends, family and employer no longer want to be associated with you because you believe the white race is superior and all the Jews and brown skinned people should be chased off, well, that's tough on you.

          This meme of "Freedom of speech != freedom from consequences" is one of the stupidest fucking things I've ever encountered on this site. It is absolutely rampant, too. Do you really have freedom of speech if you lose your job, your friends, you family over your political beliefs? I trust you would support swathes of people ostracizing somebody who happens to publicly be an atheist, or a commie, or gay, right? No! Of course you wouldn't. And you'd be right to oppose maltreatment of others with unpopular opin

          • by Anonymous Coward

            This meme of "Freedom of speech != freedom from consequences" is one of the stupidest fucking things I've ever encountered on this site. It is absolutely rampant, too.

            It's everywhere now. It did not start here nor is the worst here.

            For some reason many liberals are turning to be no longer liberal. They are playing social shaming games, ostracism, and mob rule to get their way. It's all so very abusive. They think they are in the right to do it too, especially with this eye-for-an-eye self-styled oppression olympics where they are not fighting against anyone or they are being the aggressors.

            It's getting bad and I do not know how to prevent more people from following this

          • by Gr8Apes ( 679165 )

            This meme of "Freedom of speech != freedom from consequences" is one of the stupidest fucking things I've ever encountered on this site. It is absolutely rampant, too. Do you really have freedom of speech if you lose your job, your friends, you family over your political beliefs?

            "Boss, I think you're an idiot" in the middle of a staff meeting. Freedom of speech? Sure. Freedom from consequences? Maybe in some other world.

        • by rtb61 ( 674572 )

          Let's be clear, that web site is a scammy public relations exercise to drive identity politics in order to exclude policy politics. Who paid for it and why is more important than who accessed it. Obviously part of a larger scheme to drive conflict and break up workers, to keep identity politics to the fore and drive policy back out of public purview, to keep the establishment powerful and the rest of us divided and weak. Fuck, your living conditions, the state of your genitals count for more whether natural

    • by Anonymous Coward

      This reminds me of the Chicago 8 who were tried for inciting a riot, even though not all of them had met before the trial.

      In this case, however, it will be many times more than 8.

    • If this was just a regular peaceful protest then this would be pretty questionable, but seeing how they're trying to go after the people who showed up for Trump's inauguration with the explicit purpose of rioting and destroying both public and private property (including a limo taxi owned by a muslim immigrant). I dislike Trump as much as the next guy, but a moron and an asshole being elected president is hardly an excuse to start destroying public and private property as some form of protest. Also, it nee
  • by WillAffleckUW ( 858324 ) on Tuesday August 22, 2017 @07:03PM (#55066773) Homepage Journal

    Stored as "metadata".

    Same thing.

  • by Rick Schumann ( 4662797 ) on Tuesday August 22, 2017 @07:14PM (#55066825) Journal
    Translation:

    We drew too much attention from the media and the general public with our outlandish search warrant, so rather than take all the heat for what amounted to an overreach, we (quote-unquote) 'scaled back the request' so we don't look like the jackbooted thugs we actually are.

    Pro-tip for you, guys: You still look like jackbooted thugs.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      That's fine, "looking like jackbooted thugs" is not something they're currently trying to avoid. So long as there's some degree of plausible deniability (which "walking back" the request creates), "intimidating the public" is exactly what they wanted to achieve.

      This episode has had its impact - there's been a chilling effect, everyone in America is now ever so slightly more thoughtful about what websites they visit because of it.

      Hope you enjoyed freedom of association while it lasted, because it's on its la

    • by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Tuesday August 22, 2017 @09:43PM (#55067431)
      the percentage of Americans identifying as and with Jackbooted thugs has been on the upswing.
      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) <mojo@NOSPAM.world3.net> on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @07:56AM (#55068887) Homepage Journal

        When you get people like that at the very top, it normalizes their behaviour and views. That's why Trump's opponents keep saying "this is not normal".

        • these people have legitimate complaints (lack of jobs, Healthcare, infrastructure, education opportunities) that aren't being address. I'm hoping we actually address them before it's too late and we go the same route Germany did in WWII. Though so far all I've seen is a lot of denouncing. We need that, don't get me wrong. What these people are doing is bad. But almost nobody is asking the tough questions about _why_ they're doing it.
          • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            I agree. Legitimate concerns that must be addressed. The problem is that the honest answer is "it's complicated and the solutions take time to work, and you are going to have to change your lifestyle and outlook to get there". It's very easy for someone to come in and promise to fix everything with some simplistic ideas like "build a wall".

      • Sad, isn't it? They want to drag us all back into the muck. It's like 'Crab Mentality' taken to the absolute extreme.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Then you'll be doxxed out of your livelihood or outed by IPs and internet companies like Google and Dreamhost for your wrong think.

    Gotta love the hypocrisy of the leftists here - "these Trump people are jackbooted thugs"

    No. That would be the leftists and Antifa.

    As you see here - if you deplatform Leftists you're evil - if you deplatform anybody with a conservative viewpoint you're a hero.

    Be careful of what you're building - you're not going to like the result.

    • by jbengt ( 874751 )

      Gotta love the hypocrisy of the leftists here - "these Trump people are jackbooted thugs"
      No. That would be the leftists and Antifa.

      Based on what we know about past protests, the Antiffa activists pushing for the most violent tactics are likely working undercover for the government.

  • I have plenty of reasons to hold the Trump administration in low regard, but it isn't clear this is one of them.

    Is this a politically directed Justice department dealing unto the opponents of the administration, or is this just overpowered law enforcement agents acting in the way they are accustomed?

COMPASS [for the CDC-6000 series] is the sort of assembler one expects from a corporation whose president codes in octal. -- J.N. Gray

Working...