7 ms·

What percentage of “valid” legal requests are granted versus denied?

by Lammy 1mo ago

SR2Z 1mo ago
Presumably Waymo complies with their legal obligations... The point is that there's a process, it applies both to Waymo and to you as a rando. The police don't have special access to Waymo cameras.
- inigyou 1mo ago
  So if I sent an email to Waymo I could get camera footage of a crime?
  - SR2Z 1mo ago
    Perhaps you should read this: https://selfhelp.courts.ca.gov/subpoena https://selfhelp.courts.ca.gov/subpoena
  - ssl-3 1mo ago
    More like: When an entity (including a corp like Waymo and you as a random person alike) has information (such as camera footage), then that information can be subpoenaed. Even when you've got your own camera on your own front porch making recordings on your own hard drive using your own isolated network: There is are long-established legal processes by which you can be ordered to hand over [a subset of] those recordings. Neither Waymo nor you, yourself, are exceptional to these processes.
    - inigyou 1mo ago
      Who said anything about subpoenas? Waymo says "valid legal request". When other companies say "valid legal request" it means "a police department emailed us"
- Lammy 1mo ago
  > The point is that there's a process That is the opposite of reassuring, because here are the stats for those processes as a whole (just ‘requests for user information’, not broken down by data type or Google product). Currently at 84% accepance rate i.e. the ‘process’ is a formality lol: https://transparencyreport.google.com/user-data/overview?hl=en https://transparencyreport.google.com/user-data/overview?hl=...
  - SR2Z 1mo ago
    I don't know what to tell you. The subpoena system has been around for a VERY long time before Google even existed. You seem to be unfamiliar with it so I'd encourage you to read up before you call it a "formality." This is not some newfangled shiny thing. If you hold records that are important to a court case you can be forced to give them up by court order. This is true regardless of who "you" happens to be. If police "have access" to a Waymo, it's only because they also "have access" to your phone, your medical records, your car rental history, etc., etc.
    - Lammy 1mo ago
      Why are you conflating “valid legal request” with subpoena? If they meant ”in response to subpoena” then they would say subpoena lol The linguistic ambiguity is always where the creepy extrajudicial shit seeps in. See also: ‘We do not provide any government agency with direct access to our servers’ RE: Snowden/PRISM
      - SR2Z 1mo ago
        > Why are you conflating “valid legal request” with subpoena? If they meant ”in response to subpoena” then they would say subpoena lol Because they also comply with warrants and court orders, and it's easier to say "valid legal request" than that. Probably the vast majority of data requests are subpoenas. I suppose that a FISA court could try to get footage from Waymo, but it would be difficult to do so because FISA requires a reasonable suspicion that the target is outside the United States. The (terrible) decision to allow dragnet surveillance with PRISM was allowed because the government claimed that it would be targeted mostly at people outside the borders of the US. Needless to say, data from a Waymo operating entirely inside the United States is not covered by this. Secret courts are a bad idea in general IMO, but according to the rules this should not be allowed.

What percentage of “valid” legal requests are granted versus denied?

by Lammy 1mo ago

What percentage of “valid” legal requests are granted versus denied?

SR2Z 1mo ago

Presumably Waymo complies with their legal obligations... The point is that there's a process, it applies both to Waymo and to you as a rando. The police don't have special access to Waymo cameras.

inigyou 1mo ago
So if I sent an email to Waymo I could get camera footage of a crime?
- SR2Z 1mo ago
  Perhaps you should read this: https://selfhelp.courts.ca.gov/subpoena https://selfhelp.courts.ca.gov/subpoena
- ssl-3 1mo ago
  More like: When an entity (including a corp like Waymo and you as a random person alike) has information (such as camera footage), then that information can be subpoenaed. Even when you've got your own camera on your own front porch making recordings on your own hard drive using your own isolated network: There is are long-established legal processes by which you can be ordered to hand over [a subset of] those recordings. Neither Waymo nor you, yourself, are exceptional to these processes.
  - inigyou 1mo ago
    Who said anything about subpoenas? Waymo says "valid legal request". When other companies say "valid legal request" it means "a police department emailed us"
Lammy 1mo ago
> The point is that there's a process That is the opposite of reassuring, because here are the stats for those processes as a whole (just ‘requests for user information’, not broken down by data type or Google product). Currently at 84% accepance rate i.e. the ‘process’ is a formality lol: https://transparencyreport.google.com/user-data/overview?hl=en https://transparencyreport.google.com/user-data/overview?hl=...
- SR2Z 1mo ago
  I don't know what to tell you. The subpoena system has been around for a VERY long time before Google even existed. You seem to be unfamiliar with it so I'd encourage you to read up before you call it a "formality." This is not some newfangled shiny thing. If you hold records that are important to a court case you can be forced to give them up by court order. This is true regardless of who "you" happens to be. If police "have access" to a Waymo, it's only because they also "have access" to your phone, your medical records, your car rental history, etc., etc.
  - Lammy 1mo ago
    Why are you conflating “valid legal request” with subpoena? If they meant ”in response to subpoena” then they would say subpoena lol The linguistic ambiguity is always where the creepy extrajudicial shit seeps in. See also: ‘We do not provide any government agency with direct access to our servers’ RE: Snowden/PRISM
    - SR2Z 1mo ago
      > Why are you conflating “valid legal request” with subpoena? If they meant ”in response to subpoena” then they would say subpoena lol Because they also comply with warrants and court orders, and it's easier to say "valid legal request" than that. Probably the vast majority of data requests are subpoenas. I suppose that a FISA court could try to get footage from Waymo, but it would be difficult to do so because FISA requires a reasonable suspicion that the target is outside the United States. The (terrible) decision to allow dragnet surveillance with PRISM was allowed because the government claimed that it would be targeted mostly at people outside the borders of the US. Needless to say, data from a Waymo operating entirely inside the United States is not covered by this. Secret courts are a bad idea in general IMO, but according to the rules this should not be allowed.