Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> It is a fact that they don't need individual court orders to obtain communications.

Statements like these have no information value unless you back them up. For all I know, you learned this from the "The Guardian" article I just cited.

> [...] allowing “collection managers [to send] content tasking instructions directly to equipment installed at company-controlled locations [...]

I don't think a statement about having write access to your own hardware pertains to this discussion, even if that hardware is located in Steve Ballmer's office.




Replying to your first point, here's the relevant law (FAA 702): http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1881a


That's a quite long quote, and it partly contradicts your assertions with statements like

> The procedures adopted in accordance with paragraph (1) shall be subject to judicial review pursuant to subsection (i).

... and the actual contents of subsection (i). You have to be more specific.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: