That goes without saying except for one caveat... there is a precedent... when Viacom sued Google (YouTube) for... wait for it... "One B i l l i o n Dollars" they requested the "viewing" logs and Google rolled-over for them (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/07/judge-orders-yo/). Granted, they were ordered to, but the Judge used their own prior arguments about the meaningfulness of IP addresses to support his argument.

Connect the dots... If the powers that be want information about [the owner of] an IP address, then they must already know something about the traffic to or from said IP address, no? They are already armed with data about childporn traffic (their excuse that they're using) and as well with data about wares and media traffic (the excuse they are conveniently not talking about very much are they?) as well as who-knows-what-else traffic, and they want to conveniently (i.e. without all that due process nuisance) correlate these traffic patterns to individuals for further investigation and possible prosecution (legal or other). Why is it that so many /.ers don't seem to get this?

Then you need to start small -- get your town/city to elect a "3rd party" for mayor or sheriff so they can get used to the idea of a non-dem/repub elected official. Then work your way up until you're electing representatives & senators that are 3rd party. Once the congress is no longer bi-party, things could really begin to change. Until then, wasting a presidential vote on a 3rd party is about as useful as washing your car before you go off-roading.