Why get a warrant when you can just buy it?

This whole data economy has significantly undermined privacy, including 4th amendment protections.

Admissible evidence probably requires parallel construction and then a warrant. The purchased data is the catalyst but not legally actionable.

▲

voakbasda 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Parallel construction like that is unambiguously fruit from the poison tree. It should never be allowed, and the fact that it is used routinely is one of the many ongoing travesties in the US.

	▲	eszed 2 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		My understanding is that it would be, if admitted to. That's where the parallel comes in: establish an evidentiary trail that's plausible enough to withstand defense scrutiny, and count on the court itself (ie, judge) not to dig any deeper.
	▲	duskdozer a day ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		That's the "parallel" part. They're using information that they aren't allowed to use but are constructing an alternate path to get to the same conclusion with information they could be allowed to use, even though they didn't.
	▲	some_furry 2 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Right, but since that's the world we have today, our threat models should all account for it until we can meaningfully change things.

▲

giantg2 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Do you have a ruling that says they can't used purchased data?