🚀 go-pugleaf

On 23 Mar 2024, Thank A Democrat <invalid@none.360> posted some
news:9bc955924161a0ad33683621f564c60c@dizum.com:

> If you've ever jokingly wondered if your search or viewing history is
> going to "put you on some kind of list," your concern may be more than
> warranted.
>
> In now unsealed court documents reviewed by Forbes, Google was ordered
> to hand over the names, addresses, telephone numbers, and user
> activity of Youtube accounts and IP addresses that watched select
> YouTube videos, part of a larger criminal investigation by federal
> investigators.
>
> The videos were sent by undercover police to a suspected
> cryptocurrency launderer under the username "elonmuskwhm." In
> conversations with the bitcoin trader, investigators sent links to
> public YouTube tutorials on mapping via drones and augmented reality
> software, Forbes details. The videos were watched more than 30,000
> times, presumably by thousands of users unrelated to the case.

Hell, I probably watched the drone stuff.

> YouTube's parent company Google was ordered by federal investigators
> to quietly hand over all such viewer data for the period of Jan. 1 to
> Jan. 8, 2023, but Forbes couldn't confirm if Google had complied.
>
> The mandated data retrieval is worrisome in itself, according to
> privacy experts. Federal investigators argued the request was legally
> justified as the data "would be relevant and material to an ongoing
> criminal investigation, including by providing identification
> information about the perpetrators," citing justification used by
> other police forces around the country. In a case out of New
> Hampshire, police requested similar data during the investigation of
> bomb threats that were being streamed live to YouTube — the order
> specifically requested viewership information at select time stamps
> during the live streams.

They were fishing.

> "With all law enforcement demands, we have a rigorous process designed
> to protect the privacy and constitutional rights of our users while
> supporting the important work of law enforcement," Google spokesperson
> Matt Bryant told Forbes. "We examine each demand for legal validity,
> consistent with developing case law, and we routinely push back
> against over broad or otherwise inappropriate demands for user data,
> including objecting to some demands entirely."
>
> Privacy experts, however, are worried about the kind of precedent the
> court's order creates, citing concerns over the protections of the
> first and fourth amendments. "This is the latest chapter in a
> disturbing trend where we see government agencies increasingly
> transforming search warrants into digital dragnets," executive
> director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project Albert
> Fox-Cahn told the publication. "It’s unconstitutional, it’s
> terrifying, and it’s happening every day."

The Biden administration cares naught for the law.  They've demonstrated
that repeatedly.

> Advocates have called on Google to be more transparent about its data-
> sharing policies for years, with fears stoked by ongoing open arrests
> of protestors and the creeping state-wide criminalization of abortion.
>
> In December, Google updated its privacy policies to allow users to
> save their location data directly to their devices rather than the
> cloud, and shortened the retention time for such storage — the new
> policies also indirectly stunted the long-used investigatory
> workaround in which law enforcement officials use Google location data
> to target suspects.

Don't be logged into google accounts when browsing and always turn off
your location.

> Google has been taken to court over such concerns over the past year,
> including two state supreme court cases surrounding the
> constitutionality of keyword search warrants, which force sites to
> turn over an individual's internet search data.
>
> https://mashable.com/article/google-ordered-to-hand-over-viewer-data-
> privacy-concerns