@jwildeboer@social.wildeboer.net
2026-10-18 11:17 UTC
From the times of the Silk Road bust [1]: "Because the servers were located overseas, the FBI says it didn’t need a warrant to ask foreign authorities to search the serves (sic)" This means to me we need robust oversight by courts in our countries at the very least, @EUCommission@ec.social-network.europa.eu
https://www.forbes.com/sites/katevinton/2014/09/08/the-feds-explain-how-they-seized-the-silk-road-servers/
Replies (2)
-
@davidaugust@mastodon.online 2026-10-18 11:36
@jwildeboer@social.wildeboer.net @EUCommission@ec.social-network.europa.eu very interesting on both cases. The Netherlands and Iceland have/had a reputation for defending free speech. In the Netherlands’ case, to have recently done the U.S. FBI’s bidding, with the current U.S. administration being so anti-democracy and prone to legal overreach and human rights violation, this event gives lie to the idea of the Netherlands as defenders against putin-esque censorship and/or privacy violations.
-
@ArtHarg@mastodon.nl 2026-10-18 11:58
@jwildeboer@social.wildeboer.net @EUCommission@ec.social-network.europa.eu Does this also mean that Dutch law enforcement can subpoena servers located in the US without warrants?