Feds Ordered Google To Unmask Certain YouTube Users. Critics Say It’s ‘Terrifying.’
www.forbes.com
The federal government asked Google to turn over information on anyone who viewed multiple YouTube videos. Privacy experts say the orders are unconstitutional.

If the linked article has a paywall, you can access this archived version instead: https://archive.ph/zyhax

The court orders show the government telling Google to provide the names, addresses, telephone numbers and user activity for all Google account users who accessed the YouTube videos between January 1 and January 8, 2023. The government also wanted the IP addresses of non-Google account owners who viewed the videos.

“This is the latest chapter in a disturbing trend where we see government agencies increasingly transforming search warrants into digital dragnets. It’s unconstitutional, it’s terrifying and it’s happening every day,” said Albert Fox-Cahn, executive director at the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project. “No one should fear a knock at the door from police simply because of what the YouTube algorithm serves up. I’m horrified that the courts are allowing this.” He said the orders were “just as chilling” as geofence warrants, where Google has been ordered to provide data on all users in the vicinity of a crime.

  • Gabu@lemmy.worldEnglish
    8422·
    9 months ago

    Why, would you look at that - apparently surveillance is fine and dandy, as long as it’s the US doing it. Fucking hypocrites.

  • mlg@lemmy.worldEnglish
    572·
    9 months ago

    Jokes on you I’m already on the DoD blacklist because I played War Thunder and got spammed with 40 year old “classified” NATOPs by the forums.

  • Wes_Dev@lemmy.mlEnglish
    21·
    9 months ago

    When companies tell you they respect your privacy and you should give them your data, you tell them it doesn’t matter. Because policies can change, and at the end of the day, your privacy isn’t always up to an single company.

    Wait. This was last year, so not the capitol riot. What happened in January last year? I’m in a decent mood today. Just going to skip looking deeper into this one. I have Factorio to play!

  • THCDenton@lemmy.worldEnglish
    12·
    9 months ago

    Good thing I have history turned off so I can watch “How to make an AK47 from scratch” in peace :D

    • jinwk00@lemm.eeEnglish
      51·
      9 months ago

      They still somehow track your history despite that turned off

      Notably with recommendations

  • CrypticCoffee@lemm.eeEnglish
    12·
    9 months ago

    Are the problem with the people who watch the video, or the people who create, or host the videos?

    • maniclucky@lemmy.worldEnglish
      5·
      9 months ago

      A little bit of everyone? Watchers create demand for creators, which creates demand for hosts. If any link in this chain breaks, then the little ecosystem dies.

      Though that’s both difficult and reductive. Punishing hosts drives watchers to shadier hosts, with creators following. Punishing creators just creates space for other creators to fill the gap with unpredictable content (be it more of the same, better, worse, or other). Punishing watchers is resource intensive to do well, so the focus has to be on the really bad stuff to get anything done. And conjures articles like these when done poorly.

  • Grass@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    11·
    9 months ago

    The headline made me think of back when phone networks were just starting to be fast enough to watch YouTube on data, a guy at the job I was working was caught watching videos of young girls in supposedly lacking state of dress splashing in inflatable pools or something along those lines. Dunno what happened to him but everyone thought he was a nice guy the day before and then suddenly everyone was grossed out by his mere existing.

    My immediate concern though is do they account for people who were tricked into watching like with Rick rolling?

  • SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.worldEnglish
    6·
    9 months ago

    For anyone wondering what the videos were:

    In a just-unsealed case from Kentucky reviewed by Forbes, undercover cops sought to identify the individual behind the online moniker “elonmuskwhm,” who they suspect of selling bitcoin for cash, potentially running afoul of money laundering laws and rules around unlicensed money transmitting.