I've seen this exact behavior countless times on wikipedia. If no one else is being held accountable, why should we care when this person is?

I've watched hearings at different State capitols where the phone companies were asked specifically if they knew who was making the robocalls. They all stated they knew who and where the calls originate from.

When asked if they would do anything about it, they all either refused to answer or came up with bullshit excuses.

They know. They just make too much money off the calls to care.

The phone companies know who is doing this. But they make millions allowing it. THAT is where you stop this problem.

Why are web browsers passing all this extra information?

This has been going on for decades before Trump.

If you're only outraged now, it's either because you're ignorant of history, in which case you should also be angry at all past presidents now that said ignorance has been dispelled, or you have TDS.

The FBI (and other agencies) think that by "outsourcing" what would otherwise be a "warrantless" search if they (the FBI / LEO) performed said data collection, it some how absolves themselves of any 4th amendment violations.

It doesn't matter who collects the data, if you are searching through said data, it is a defacto search and gains 4th amendment protections. A third party cannot wave someone else's 4th amendment rights.

Fuck. I agree with rsilvergun...

Damnit!

It realistically doesn't. No where in the constitution is this protection enumerated. It was literally made up by the courts to protect the government from their fuckups.

No, it was a violation of the other people's privacy.

I can't begin to recount how many instances I've read about where police fabricate cause for a warrant. There needs to be some repercussions against both the police and the judges who rubber stamp these.

It is getting out of hand how frequent this practice is.

So congress can use insider knowledge to make money, but mere plebeians cannot.

IIRC, this injunction usually applies to US based Domain Name servers, as the courts lack jurisdiction to enforce the ruling internationally.

When government overreach and business opportunity meat, there is tyranny.

So, can I plug my Apple TV into it and never need to worry about that third party watching me or getting popover ads crap?

They were getting bad PR because of how they went about litigating against "individuals".

The record labels would first sue the ISP and then demand discovery to obtain the ISP's customer base.

They would then drop the first case and, with the newly "discovered" information, file a second case against against the john/jane doe entity without even verifying if the defendant of the case actually was the entity that breached their copyright, merely them owning the IP associated with the activity being enough..

They would then demand excessive amounts of compensation grossly disproportionate with the "harm" they claim was incurred.

This became an incredibly shady business model that persisted for a decade. And in most jurisdictions is considered a frivolous law suit or abuse of the courts.