I'm not sure how even ignorant law enforcement raids go from "maintaining additional copies" to "obstructing justice."

I just meant that if the Secret Service think you have some illegal material, like login/pws to a VPN for ATM machines -- then not handing over all copies is likely considered obstruction/non-compliance. Even if it turned out that those documents were not actually of the nature -- if the warrant/investigation was otherwise legal, one isn't allowed to simply "keep a backup".

Eg: http://www.wired.com/2015/01/barrett-brown-sentenced-5-years...

"The obstruction charge relates to an attempt by Brown and his mother to hide a laptop from authorities during a search of her home in March 2012. Brown’s mother was separately charged with obstruction and given six months probation."

At any rate, my point was that if you have a list of credit card numbers, and the Secret Service comes and asks for them. It is not ok to keep an off-site backup.

I'm not saying that the US government isn't behaving batshit crazy wrt hackers ever since around the Kevin Mitnick case, or that the current laws makes sense -- nor that the priorities makes sense -- just that "having an off-site backup" isn't a defence against a rouge state. Especially if you are a subject of that state.

Now I see your point.

However, I'd argue to a judge that I can't be "non-compliant" about surrendering all copies of illegal material until the court decides that the material is indeed illegal. Just because law enforcement wants to bring charges doesn't mean I'm actually guilty of anything yet.