Let say that the DoJ is attempting to contend in court that internet searches for child porn is more common than the defendants contend it is. The simplest way is to get a sample week from the three big search engines and put the numbers together. That's the best way I imagine the DoJ would use what the report says they asked for: to say that out of X number of searches, Y were for child porn in some form and those searches netted Z number of results.

That doesn't strike me as anything a reasonable person would consider a concession. I actually think that most folks would consider that a prudent request. Then again, most folks don't have the axe ot grind that the Times does.