Also, just because there isn't a "human" that does the search manually, doesn't mean the human doesn't benefit from the search (exactly as if he would if he did the search himself).

And another thing: the 4th Amendment clearly talks about searches and seizures, so saying "we're only collecting it, but not searching it" shouldn't work as an excuse either.

EFF should also make a case for how searching into your online Facebook accounts, Google accounts, chat accounts and so on, is the "searching through your home without a warrant and fishing for crimes of the 21st century" - or something along those lines.

A third party may hold the data for you, but people think of those accounts as "theirs", and they have an expectation of privacy for them. If you keep something in a bank deposit box, does the bank own your deposit box and everything in it? Or is that "yours", and you expect nobody but you to access that? Right now, the government much prefers to go to these companies and just ask them for what you have in those accounts, because it's so much easier for them to do that, than ask you. But I feel they are skirting an important right humans should be having here.

The "physical" protections seem to be so much better than the "digital" protections in the US law right now. It's time to change that, and make it clear that digital protections should be at least as strong as the kind of protections we benefit from in the real world.

For example, it makes no sense for email to be considered under a much lower standard than real mail. They are both exactly the same type of communication. It's just the medium that's different, but that shouldn't matter at all.