Re:Destruction of evidence charges filed for remotely wiping...
by dragonwriter on Wednesday November 14, 2018 @10:07AM
(#18450326)
> Maybe, though I would say that it is odd that some companies (who presumably have legal council) have decided to implement warrant canaries
Warrant canaries are an effective PR move irrespective of the legality of tripping them. They only stop working as a PR move if you don't trip them after getting a secret warrant and that warrant later becomes non-secret.
In Australia we have an explicit law which makes it illegal to talk about the existence or non-existence of a journalist surveillance warrant (though in Australia you might not even be aware of such a warrant's existence). This means that any discussion of such warrants is technically illegal -- making warrant canaries impossible to implement here. The minimum sentence is 2 years, and it's specifically targeted toward journalists (and affects anyone who shares already-public information -- so retweeting such a story on Twitter would be a serious crime).