Someone is going to have to help me with this. I don't see where you're getting that google provided at least some data in around 85% of WARRANTLESS cases. I only see how it adds up to releasing SOME data for WARRANTED or other which isn't defined (but only a fraction of the requests).
What am I missing Scoobydoo99?
Image
Look at the chart on the right. The blue dots for "subpoena", "search warrant", and "other" are all on top of each other, in the 85% range. The WARRANTLESS requests are the "subpoena" ones (medium blue). A subpoena doesn't require a judge and is basically a request from law enforcement.
----------
Following 9/11, it was announced that ALL e-mail would be scanned / perused / analyzed by AT&T computers using a program called Viper (or something similar) to determine which users might be planning more attacks. ONE room? In 10 to 20 and more locations. People who were unaware f this just are too young or don't keep up with current affairs.
To accuse the U.S. of violating the law and the privacy of those using the internet is ridiculous in light of the consequences. It is interesting that the outcome of the original class-action case in 2006 is not stated in the Wikipedia article on Room 641A.
i assume your response is sarcastic? for a minute there you had me thinking someone could really be THAT jingoistic! That all it takes to make it OK is for it to be "announced" that the government is throwing civil rights out the window. I think someone did that once before, like in Germany....?