The search warrant seems pretty broad, and includes "http and error logs". It looks like they're more interested in who set up and maintained the site rather than who visited it[0]<p>Seems like dubious legal ground to demand to visitors to the site. I hope dreamhost resists that part of the warrant as unconstitutional. I would like to see the legal justification tested in court.<p>0. <a href="https://www.dreamhost.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/DH-Search-Warrant.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://www.dreamhost.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/DH...</a>
>The warrant was made public Monday, when DreamHost announced[0] its plans to challenge the government in court. The DoJ declined to comment. A hearing is scheduled for Friday.<p>Good luck Dreamhost; fight this tyranny!<p>[0]<a href="https://www.dreamhost.com/blog/we-fight-for-the-users/" rel="nofollow">https://www.dreamhost.com/blog/we-fight-for-the-users/</a>
Seems like we're at a tipping point. It does seem like there needs to be more "Peaceable" in the "Right to Peaceably Assemble". But if you're investigating someone who bludgeoned a police officer for example, and the site is your only lead, it may be justified. Would it also be wrong if it could find the identity of the unknown driver of a car that mowed down BLM protestors (I realize we know the drivers identity, but its a hypothetical)? What if there was a shooter in the crowd? Generally you can't expect privacy when you show up to a giant public event, especially when crimes are committed.