Glassdoor case nicely summarizes the history of cases protecting anonymity under the First Amendment: Ohio Elections Commission, but plenty of others have weighed in since then. Over and over again, courts have said that anonymity is protected under the First Amendment, and you need to have very strong reasons to pierce the anonymity. Not even armchair lawyers could possibly think so. We all should be.Īnd, just to be clear, there is no way the subpoena is even remotely Constitutional. She also notes, appropriately, that she’s “really really ticked off” about all of this. Twitter has told her that any motion to quash the subpoena needs to be filed this week. ĭissent Doe explained to me later that her lawyers have tried, repeatedly, to contact the DOJ about this ridiculous subpoena, and the DOJ has ignored all attempts to communicate. Guess we're going to court in Texas, because… FTS.
#POPEHAT TWITTER POLITICAL CARTOONS UPDATE#
To update you all: DOJ did NOT withdraw its subpoena to for my info. She revealed the DOJ’s stunning decision to keep going over the weekend, noting that she now needs to fight the subpoena in court. Dissent Doe, for one, has strong reasons for retaining anonymity, given her focus on data breaches and privacy issues. The rest are at least partially pseudonymous. Ken White and Keith Lee are both known (and each has blogged about the situation). We can cover that second point first because there’s not much more to say beyond “What the fuck is wrong with the DOJ?” As you may recall, the five Twitter users whose info was sought by the subpoena included (“Mike Honcho”), (“Virgil”), (Ken White), (Keith Lee) and (Dissent Doe).
The DOJ is doubling down, demanding the identity (and more) of Twitter users because someone they never should have arrested, sent a smiley emoji to them. We now have two updates on that story: (1) Shafer is appealing the fact that he’s still in jail, months later and (2) the DOJ has refused to withdraw the emoji subpoena. That story is even more insane than it sounds, but I’m not going to repeat the details here - I’ll just repeat: the case involved the DOJ demanding the identity (and more) of five Twitter users because someone else (who they’re railroading over bogus charges) sent a smiley emoji to them on Twitter where they were discussing a different lawsuit altogether. Of course, what first brought the case to my attention was an even more ridiculous part of the story, in which the DOJ had sent a subpoena to Twitter demanding basically all info on five Twitter users - even though two of them don’t hide their identity - because Shafer tweeted a smiley emoji at them. It seems clear that Shafer never should have been arrested (and never should have had the FBI raid his house three times over just a few months). As we explained, the arrest and prosecution of Shafer appeared to be the result of a truly ridiculous vendetta against Shafer by the FBI because Shafer got angry over a previous (and totally misguided) decision to raid his home, after he properly disclosed security problems involving some dental practice software. Last month, I had two blog posts about a particularly insane lawsuit being pushed by the Justice Department against a computer security researcher, Justin Shafer. Mon, Nov 13th 2017 09:34am - Mike Masnick
0 kommentar(er)
