In his 30 page ruling, US District Judge T.S. Ellis found that Wikimedia and the other plaintiffs had no standing, and could not prove that they had been spied on.
Judge Elliss found that there is no way to definitively know if Wikimedia, which publishes Wikipedia, one of the largest sites on the Internet, is being watched by the spooks.
According to Ars Technica he was not that impressed with Wikipedia’s logic that because it was so big, it must have been a target of NSA survellience.
As he wrote in his memorandum opinion that the statistical analysis on which the argument rests is incomplete and riddled with assumptions.
“The plaintiffs insist that Wikipedia’s over one trillion annual Internet communications is significant in volume. But plaintiffs provide no context for assessing the significance of this figure. One trillion is plainly a large number, but size is always relative. For example, one trillion dollars are of enormous value, whereas one trillion grains of sand are but a small patch of beach,” he wrote.
He added that the plaintiffs have alleged facts that plausibly establish that the NSA uses Upstream surveillance at some number of chokepoints. But they failed to establish that the NSA is using Upstream surveillance to copy all or substantially all communications passing through those chokepoints. In this regard, plaintiffs can only speculate.
Since the Snowden revelations about NSA spying it has been difficult for legal challenges filed against government surveillance to advance in the courts. This is mostly because the victim have to prove they were hacked.