Imagine if someone who served time in prison and afterwards got their life on track had their parole deemed violated because they watched some YouTube videos at the wrong time or their location data placed them close to an event that they had no knowledge of or association with.
The links included in the court order request that was approved:
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/lRQu71VPl2s
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=nI2Y9pQIqIA
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=G2OE7l4vQqs
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Imagine the perpetrator of the criminal activity in question veiwed the videos on piped.video but sent a youtu.be link to the agents. All of the information collected by the order would have been innocent people whose 4th amendment rights were violated.
So far, not even the courts can agree on whether these orders are constitutional, setting up a likely legal challenge before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Probably because the SCOTUS is occupied completely by geriatric seniors who don’t understand anything about the internet. Anyone who understands the issue can see plain as day that it’s unconstitutional and a violation of American ideals
