Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Sure, but the idea that tweets have an expectation of privacy, reasonable or not, is absurd.

From a PR point of view, Twitter did the right thing. They executed their right to challenge the subpoena. Now they have to begrudgingly hand over the data. It makes it look like they'll fight for their users, even though there's clearly nothing they can do.



Sure, but the idea that tweets have an expectation of privacy, reasonable or not, is absurd.

What about the rest of the information associated with a Twitter account?


The top comment, by Tangaroa, points to 18 USC 2703 which covers this. A company can be compelled to give that information.

You really find it odd that the government can force company X to turn over your ip address, name, email and other such information?

The concern over growing fascism comes from warrantless government behavior. This, on the other hand, seems completely within the realm of government acting properly.


You really find it odd that the government can force company X to turn over your ip address, name, email and other such information?

People keep on pointing out to you that the judge applied a standard meant for public information to a request for non-public information.


I expect my Direct Messages in Twitter to be private -- don't you?


It looks like the judge did agree on that part, that Twitter DMs are a separate category of message more like email.


You're right. I stand corrected. I found the article confusing, but maybe it's just me. If the judge agreed that the subpoena is inadequate, why did he still order Twitter to disclose all public and private data from September 15, 2011 to December 30, 2011? I guess some of those protections are based on a date range?




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

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

Search: