Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, March 18, 2017

Internet giant Google is vowing to fight a search warrant demanding that Edina police be able to collect information on any resident who used certain search terms as authorities try to locate a thief who swindled a resident out of $28,500. Privacy law experts say that the warrant is based on an unusually broad definition of probable cause that could set a troubling precedent. "This kind of warrant is cause for concern because it's closer to these dragnet searches that the Fourth Amendment is designed to prevent," said William McGeveran, a law professor at the University of Minnesota.




Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Issued by Hennepin County District Judge Gary Larson in early February, the warrant pertains to anyone who searched variations of the resident's name on Google from Dec. 1 through Jan. 7.

In addition to basic contact information for people targeted by the warrant, Google is being asked to provide Edina police with their Social Security numbers, account and payment information, and IP (internet protocol) and MAC (media access control) addresses.


Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.


... Supposedly, the warrant [PDF] limits Google's search for searches to the Edina area, but that puts Google in the position of determining who was located where when these searches were made. Not that Google is likely to fulfill this request, warrant or not. There's nothing approaching probable cause in the warrant -- just the minimum of "detective" work that failed to uncover similar images in response to search terms at Yahoo and Bing.

Incredibly, this isn't the Edina PD's first attempt to obtain search results and the identifying information associated with them. In the warrant, Detective David Lindman notes he'd already served Google with an administrative subpoena, which Google rejected because it demanded content rather than transaction records. ...

I don't necessarily agree with google's reason for rejecting the subpoena. I do, however, think that the subpoena is too broad, seeming to be focusing upon gross data collection rather than targeted crime solving. The Edina PD seems to be trying to collect as much data for whatever reason, and then sifting through the data to find ~issues~ to track down at a later date.

#1 | Posted by LampLighter at 2017-03-18 08:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

imo, probably all the more reason to use


as a search engine.

#2 | Posted by LampLighter at 2017-03-18 09:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Q: How do I worship Cthulhu

Best Answer: Start by reading any Cthulhu Mythos book that you can get hold of.

Although there's not much chance of getting access to a 'Necronomicon' or a 'De Vermis Mysteriis', you can occasionally find a used copy of something like the 'Ponape Scripture' (1907 edition) or 'Cthulhu in the Necronomicon' in one of the more exotic antiquarian bookshops off the Charing Cross Road.

Works such as this will provide a good grounding in the Mythos and may encourage you to advance in your attempts to worship the Great Old Ones and Outer Gods. However, they may also turn your mind and encourage you to do something less positive, such as eat your cat or gouge your own eyes out with a screwdriver.

Assuming that you wish to start worshipping Cthulhu, your next move should be to find a location close to the sea where you can establish your shrine.

If you can find a place close to a site of known Deep One activity then so much the better, as this species have been worshipping Cthulhu for millenia and may be able to assist you. The area around Walberswick and Southwold on the coast of Suffolk, close to the sunken town of Dunwich, would be a good choice. It is possible that other like-minded individuals might choose to move to such an area, so keep your eyes open for other eccentric types who might wander around the coast at night and gibber in strange languages, or who have the prominent eyes or webbed fingers indicating the Deep One taint caused by interbreeding with these creatures. Mind you, this is East Anglia, so not every web-handed gibbering idiot is necessarily a servant of Cthulhu.

Assuming that you've found a good location, you should attempt to conduct rituals to Cthulhu (as outlined in most good Mythos books). Although the exact form of these varies, you should be able to manage with about a dozen flickering black candles, a few blasphemous statues of Cthuloid entities, a set of ceremonial robes embroidered with strange symbols, a sacrificial dagger, and at least one human victim. How you get these together is your problem.

Having either made contact with the Deep Ones or communed with Cthulhu who may send his commands through evil dreams, you can get down to the business of becoming a true, hard-core, zero-SAN, cultist of Cthulhu.

Obviously there is a price to be paid for membership of this exclusive organisations. But, assuming you don't mind spending the remainder of your life in thrall to mindless alien gods, permanently smelling of fish, gripped by catastrophic mental illness (and having to restrain yourself from shouting 'Cthulhu fthagn!!' at regular intervals) and with the risk that anti-Cthulhu vigilantes could arrive at any minute and slaughter you and everyone else in your cult with automatic weapons, it's not that bad a choice.


#3 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2017-03-19 02:02 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Yeah, read my google history. I dare you.

#4 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2017-03-19 02:06 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

unusually broad definition of probable cause that could set a troubling precedent.

Seems like this violates the whole definition of warrant.

#5 | Posted by Crassus at 2017-03-19 10:44 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

This warrant should be thrown out of court, it's ridiculous. Of course it is unconstitutional. Hey, why not have a warrant to read all of our mail and all of our internet activities for the entire nation? Same thing, just a bigger scale.

#6 | Posted by danni at 2017-03-19 11:17 AM | Reply

Besides I am betting the police in their ignorance think google can pull all this information with a simple query. I would hate to have to mine the data to try and produce even the searches not to mention things like a searchers SSN... They have been watching too much CSI in Edina.

#7 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2017-03-19 11:55 AM | Reply

It almost sounds like the detectives are a bit lazy.

#8 | Posted by SLBronkowitz at 2017-03-19 12:08 PM | Reply

" I would hate to have to mine the data to try and produce even the searches not to mention things like a searchers SSN... "

But Interstate Crosscheck disenfranchised 1.1 million registered voters without bothering to use the SS numbers, or even their middle names, as criteria. Can you deal with that? Or are you like so many who reject the information because it doesn't support the idea that the Republicans win elections fairly? They don't, they haven't for decades. This country accepts their duplicity as if it is a right.

#9 | Posted by danni at 2017-03-19 12:20 PM | Reply

The name of the judge who issued this is "Gary Larson"?

He should be removed from the bench, disbarred and forced to change his name as not to be confused with the Gary Larson of The Far Side fame.

#10 | Posted by Sully at 2017-03-19 12:32 PM | Reply



Most people are swindled because of greed or stupidity and it is often done by non-American citizens. As outrageous as the tactic is, it should not be used to open the door to dragnet searches where probable cause is secondary. There are other search engines that supposedly keep no logs. www.startpage.com another.

#11 | Posted by Robson at 2017-03-19 02:49 PM | Reply

Very troubling. Thanks to Robson and Lamplighter for tipping me to alternative search engines.

#12 | Posted by cbob at 2017-03-19 03:42 PM | Reply

#9 | Posted by Conspiracy Theorist

Interstate Crosscheck is a data matching service that has no power to disenfranchise anyone. Only state and local election official have the power to remove a voter from the rolls in accord with state and federal law.

That deflection aside, this warrant appears to be a classic "fishing expedition" and should be quashed.

#13 | Posted by et_al at 2017-03-19 08:51 PM | Reply

"the warrant is based on an unusually broad definition of probable cause that could set a troubling precedent. "

Um, YEAH. A wee bit too broad and a wee bit too troubling.

#14 | Posted by TheTom at 2017-03-19 09:42 PM | Reply

@rat, your google history consists of worldnetdaily, Breitbart, infowars, foxnews, Newsmax...... did I leave any out????

#15 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2017-03-19 11:03 PM | Reply

why not have a warrant to read all of our mail and all of our internet activities for the entire nation?
#6 | Posted by danni

Isn't this what NSA does?

#16 | Posted by SomebodyElse at 2017-03-20 08:56 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2017 World Readable

Drudge Retort