MADISON, Wis. (AP) – Federal prosecutors have withdrawn a subpoena seeking the identities of thousands of people who bought used books through online retailer Amazon.com Inc. (NASDAQ:AMZN) , newly unsealed court records show.
The withdrawal came after a judge ruled the customers have a First Amendment right to keep their reading habits from the government. ‘The (subpoena’s) chilling effect on expressive e-commerce would frost keyboards across America,’ U.S. Magistrate Judge Stephen Crocker wrote in a June ruling.
‘Well-founded or not, rumors of an Orwellian federal criminal investigation into the reading habits of Amazon’s customers could frighten countless potential customers into canceling planned online book purchases,’ the judge wrote in a ruling he unsealed last week. Seattle-based Amazon said in court documents it hopes Crocker’s decision will make it more difficult for prosecutors to obtain records involving book purchases. Assistant U.S. Attorney John Vaudreuil said Tuesday he doubted the ruling would hamper legitimate investigations.
Sanity prevails in this round………
And I doubt if it will keep the inmates in charge of this asylum from further attempts to rule as autocrats.
This reminds me of the joke where a guy drops his car keys and starts looking for them 50 feet away under a light pole because the light is better there.
IOW–this sort of “investigation” might be more justified if they were doing an adequate job elsewhere.
And BushCo is only breaking the ice here. Subsequent presidents will push the door further open unless they get forcefully closed.
I don’t trust Hilliary. Secretive. Lying. Two Faced. Worse than Bush because I don’t think she even believes it, but it is pragmatic in her view to pander to the masses. Atleast Bush knows he is pandering to a declining minority. Strange thing politics.
Hmmm… Anyone wonders if The goverment will help AT&T buy Amazon?
Yeah, except this wasn’t a terrorism investigation. They’re going after somebody for not paying taxes on things he sold online. He pled not guilty, and they needed the customers’ testimony. Seems to me they could should be able to get that information through a regular subpoena.
Looks like the judge is protecting Amazon’s book sales.
I can’t believe I’m going to side with the government on this one — or at least I’ll concede that it’s not a totally unreasonable request.
In any case, this is exactly why we have a system of judges approving search warrants.
But, of course, the time-honored system of warrants is under full assault by conservatives who claim it is an hindrance to law enforcement.
the moral of the story: Work under the table, and buy everything in cash.
#4 – Looks like the judge is protecting Amazon’s book sales.
Good. You conservatives are always wanting government out of business’s hair. You know, corporations have a right to make money and all… Well, there you go. Mission accomplished.
The fact that might civil liberties got protected in the bargain is just icing on the cake.
#5
If you read the details of the case carefully you’ll find that the government wanted the details of 24,000 customers who had purchased books from the defendents. Amazon and the judge found a compromise that avoided dilution of 1st amendment rights while enabling the grand jury to proceed with it’s case.
It was a bone headed move by the prosecutor. In the rest of the investigation Amazon cooperated fully and protected their customer’s rights. And yes, it was a totally unreasonable request which would have given US grand juries a ridiculous amount of power to scrutinize your buying habits.
Is this that different from the cops getting credit card records, without warrants? Allowing such requests chills credit card sales as people want to protect their privacy of what they purchased.
They already monitor library books, so why is Amazon exempt and libraries aren’t? First Admendment doesn’t apply to libraries?
#10 – It does, but the unconstitutional monitoring of libraries hasn’t been successfully challenged yet.
“Sanity prevails in this round………”
well, probably only temporarily.
Feds can use DoD or other agency to get the informations under antiterrorism, and without the warrant…