wiedzmin writes: Twitter filed a surprisingly feisty motion (.pdf) this week in New York City Criminal Court to quash a court order demanding that it hands over information and tweets of one of its account holders to law enforcement. The company stepped in with the motion after the account holders effort to quash the order, claiming 4th Amendment protections was rejected, by the judge claiming that online content stored on a third-party server was not physical and therefore did not have the same privacy protections. To add insult to injury, the judge claimed that account holder had no standing to fight the order because agreeing to the Twitter's terms of service, “demonstrated a lack of proprietary interests in his [own] Tweets”. Twitter fired back at the New York court, rebuking many points made by the judge, pointing out his mistakes in selective quoting of their Terms of Service and lashing out at prosecutors for wasting everyone's time by requesting the court to grant access to public Tweets, which could have been easily printed out from the site. The American Civil Liberties Union applauded Twitter’s move.
wiedzmin writes: A Colorado woman that was ordered by a federal judge to decrypt her laptop hard-drive for police last month, appears to have forgotten her password. If she does not remember the password by month’s end, as ordered, she could be held in contempt and jailed until she complies. It appears that bad memory is now a federal offense.
wiedzmin writes: Federal prosecutors want a judge to overrule the Fifth Amendment’s protection against forced self-incrimination by ordering a Colorado woman to provide the password to decrypt her laptop, which the government seized with a search warrant. The case is being closely watched by digital rights groups, as the issue has never been squarely weighed in on by federal courts, despite a similar case involving child pornography making it to the Supreme Court back in 2006.
wiedzmin writes: Japanese Defense Ministry has awarded Fujitsu a contract to develop a vigilante computer virus, which will track down and eliminate other viruses, or rather — their sources of origin. Are "good" viruses a bad idea? Sophos seems to think so.
wiedzmin writes: Subpoenas are expected to go out this week to ISP's in what could be a biggest BitTorrent downloading case in U.S. history. At least 23,000 file sharers are being targeted by the U.S. Copyright Group for downloading "Expendables". Company appears to have adopted Righthaven's strategy in blanket-suing large numbers of defendants and offering an option to quickly settle online for a moderate payment. The IP addresses of defendants have allegedly been collected by paid snoops capturing IP addresses of all peers who were downloading or seeding Sylvester Stallone's flick last year. I am curious to see how this will tie into the the BitTorrent case ruling made earlier this year, indicating that an IP address does not uniquely identify the person behind it.