The government must first prove that the records are relevant and useful in capturing a target, but essentially the government can force a company to provide it with private information. An example would be the NSA's collection of telephone billing records, but "it does not intercept the content of the call nor does it know the identity of the subscriber" (YOO, 2014). They were only interested in tracking the phone numbers of suspected al-Qaeda members who send messages home in order to show “probable cause” to the FISC. In this case, there was no real invasion of privacy since the content of the calls and the names of the caller were not revealed. This was done solely to prove that someone had ties to Al-Qaeda and this would then be considered probable cause to investigate further. The collection of metadata about phone calls does not violate the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment only protects “rights in the content of the communication, but not in addressing information” (YOO, 2014). In Smith v. Maryland, the Supreme Court ruled that call information is not protected by the Fourth Amendment because telephone users voluntarily give their information to the telephone company and privacy cannot be expected once passed to someone else (YOO,