I get what you're saying... that this isn't some shady National Security Letter deal. This is "how it's supposed to work" with a judge signing off on a subpoena.

But I think you are missing why this is of interest to many people: What criminal charges are being investigated here? The article makes it sound like "disorderly conduct" but surely that can't be right. I guess it's unfair to make assumptions since we obviously don't have all the facts, but based on the public information about this case there is certainly at least the appearance that it is based on trumped up, retaliatory charges.