Slashdot Mirror
FBI Seizes Library Computers Without Warrant
An anonymous reader writes "Two FBI agents walked into a public library in Maryland, without a warrant, and walked out with two computers. The library director agreed to release the machines to these smooth-talking feds. According to the article, the director of Frederick County Public Libraries indicated that this was the third time in his 10 years there that the FBI had requested records, but the first time they had come without a court order. The director seemed to indicate no regrets, stating 'It was a decision I made on my experience and the information given to me.' He further justified his actions, noting that the agents indicated specific computers they needed (of the several dozen in the library) and further that they 'had an awful lot of information.'" The library director speculated whether the raid may have involved the Bruce Ivins / anthrax case, musing "Obviously it coincided with the events everyone is talking about," but he said the agents hadn't mentioned it.
If they had an "awful lot of information.." then they could have gotten a damn court order. When you just roll over and accept totalitarianism, don't complain when they come for you next, with nothing more than "an awful lot of information..."
This country and its people are a disgrace.
They could be fake agents, who know an awful lot of information BECAUSE they are the criminals.
This way without a court order, they can simply clean up after themselves.
Nice.
Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
You can always ask for something and be given it. Warrants are only needed to forcibly remove an article.
Conservative, mod down for violating
I probably didn't say it succinctly enough, but that was exactly my point. I like to think that *we* own those computers in the library. My taxes paid for the construction, maintenance, and my overdue fines (sigh) also support it.
I don't want some mildly educated librarian making the decision whether to *give* stuff to a federal official.
That decision is for judges to make. It is not the librarian's decision to make, no more than it would be mine if I were a teenager working there at the time the officials walked in. With public assets comes increased accountability, which is why laws for crimes on public property (city halls, post offices) are generally so draconian.
The librarian should be subject to a thorough questioning of her judgment, with retraining or dismissal as indicated. :)
Slashdotter, ID #101. UIDs are in binary, right?
If the cops come to your house, ask for your laptop and you say "Here you go!" that's fine, but this was a public library. I would argue that the librarian was far from the owner of the computer and he certainly wasn't the user of it. It's not the computer itself that I worry about, it's the information on it - what it was and what it's going to be used for.
But, to the extent that the public expects some measure of anonymity in a public library, it strikes me as a very bad PR decision.
I remember reading another article on how some librarian association or another was fighting tooth and nail about keeping records of what books were checked out by whom away from law enforcement without warrant. It baffled me why they were doing this until I realized they were fighting for their very existence. If goons with badges can go about asking for records of who reads what on a whim the police can effectively shutter a library by flooding it with requests for records. While the staff is running around to satisfy the whims of goons with badges nothing productive can be done and the people will never enter a library again for fear that yet another book was flagged as "bad" for public consumption and anyone reading it must be called in for questioning.
So, I agree, this is a very bad PR move. People expect to be able to read whatever they wish without some government agent looking over their shoulder.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Elections are funded by public dollars, too. Who did you vote for in the last election?
"Was it a millionaire who said 'Imagine No Posessions?'" -- Elvis Costello
The value of a public library is that it offers the public the opportunity to inform and educate itself -- long recognized as valuable to enable the informed vote of the enfranchised in a democracy.
To this end, the privacy of what the individual choses to inform him- or herself about has long been upheld by the courts.
Imagine the chilling effect if the public could not inform itself about documents in a library contrary to the present government without scrutiny.
What the public has a right to know, and oversee, is WHAT the library chooses to make available, and not who reads it.
In Liberty, Rene