zlacker

[return to "Google ordered to identify who watched certain YouTube videos"]
1. addict+J6[view] [source] 2024-03-23 02:39:20
>>wut42+(OP)
There are different incidents here.

The first one where the police uploaded videos and wanted viewer information is absolutely egregious and makes me wonder how a court could authorize that.

The next one, which I didn’t fully understand, but appeared to be in response to a swatting incident where the culprit is believed to have watched a specific camera livestream and the police provided a lot of narrowing details (time period, certain other characteristics, etc) appears far more legitimate.

◧◩
2. godels+Zb[view] [source] 2024-03-23 03:52:38
>>addict+J6
I don't understand how either of these are remotely constitutional. They sure aren't what is in the spirit.

They asked for information about a video watched 30k times. Supposing every person watched that video 10 times AND supposing the target was one of the viewers (it really isn't clear that this is true), that's 2999 people who have had their rights violated to search for one. I believe Blackstone has something to say about this[0]. Literally 30x Blackstone's ratio, who heavily influenced the founding fathers.

I don't think any of this appears legitimate.

Edit: Ops [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone%27s_ratio

◧◩◪
3. Cobras+ue[view] [source] 2024-03-23 04:25:50
>>godels+Zb
I agree that it's egregious, but Sir Blackstone was talking about punishment, especially relating to execution, and I think perhaps the ratio can be adjusted significantly downward when the cost to the innocent is much lower. Otherwise, the only reasonable search would be when a government official is already certain of your guilt.
◧◩◪◨
4. godels+Gh[view] [source] 2024-03-23 05:16:18
>>Cobras+ue
I'd consider your rights being violated "punishment."

Blackstone was talking in the abstract. Clearly Franklin was too considering many of the other things he's known for saying.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. andsoi+nl[view] [source] 2024-03-23 06:22:47
>>godels+Gh
> I'd consider your rights being violated "punishment."

You are wrong. Punishment is when you impose a penalty as retribution for an offense.

[go to top]