zlacker

>>nickth+(OP)
I'm completely ok with the police asking me for video from my doorbell. I'm not ok with the police using the third party doctrine and asking the hosting service for my video without asking me. That video is every bit my property as the files in my desk drawer and should be subject to the same protections.

>>indymi+79
It's a mistake to trust a cloud service with your data and expect no one to take advantage of the fact that they are the ones holding it.

>>smolde+Jg
Yah, that's not the problem he's referencing.

He's referencing that we have early 20th and late 19th century case law about third parties holding documents, etc, that is used to make everything sitting at a cloud service subject to subpoena without a warrant (email, etc, too).

There's all kinds of precedent that was based on sane tradeoffs for the 1800's that doesn't make sense anymore with the more complicated ways we transact and interact and with the ability of technology to commit mass surveillance.