I guess it depends on who is running the service. We cannot serve a judicial order or a court order to an entity that's currently under investigation. If we're going to be asking about details of their possible criminal enterprise, we cannot even serve them with something like that.
We have to take into account the information we're receiving. In the way our investigations flow, there's more than just evidence of the offence that we are trying to collect, and there's precedence in that. When we write the search warrants for a computer system, for example, we're searching for evidence of the offence—let's say photos, emails or something like that—but we're also searching for evidence of something like the use of a particular device or the use of an account.
In terms of what can be provided to us regarding services, a lot of the time we're trying to corroborate and establish who might actually be behind or in control of the unknown that we are trying to establish. This does happen. For example, when we write a production order for a home service and obtain information that a second security system service has been purchased, we do a follow-up production order to obtain the location of that. We identify other homes belonging to the individuals. We identify other operations or facilities they may have that they're obtaining services for.
For us, it's about the importance of being able to establish not only evidence of the offence but also other potential sources for evidence we could write about going forward.