That's just not how it works. The judge is only considering whether sufficient facts have been alleged to constitute probable cause. Whether or not the seizure of the domain name violates the First Amendment is not relevant to the court's analysis of the application's sufficiency. Of course such concerns could be raised at trial, but for the warrant purposes they are irrelevant.
It isn't this simple. What is the purpose of seizure - to gain evidence? Or to effect a pretrial punishment that sends a scalding message? There are few precedents for the seizure of non-tangible goods that are also income sources for these companies. The net effect is to shut them down - rights and fairness are only pretenses.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by dr flodo.
Re: Re: Re: Discussion
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by dr flodo.
Submit a story now.