Promote Your Attorney Profile on Law.net - Get Found / Earn More!
Better Legal System Needed in China
Better Legal System Needed in China
Silicon Valley Company Busted for Wage Theft
Silicon Valley Company Busted for Wage Theft
‘Patent Trolls’ Losing Their Fight with Big Tech Companies
‘Patent Trolls’ Losing Their Fight with Big Tech Companies
Airbnb Arriving Soon in San Francisco
Airbnb Arriving Soon in San Francisco
Legal Job Listings

Twitter Subpoena Raises a Storm of Legal Questions

On Thursday, electronic privacy advocates argued that the subpoena to Twitter seeking the tweets of an Occupy Wall Street protester violates his rights to free speech and privacy. The filing from ACLU holds that Twitter is not the owner of the tweets of Malcolm Harris, but he, Harris is the only owner of his tweets.

This is in line with Twitter’s own representation that it runs a platform and does not own the content. Hence, argue the challengers, the subpoena to Twitter to hand over the tweets of Malcolm Harris is misdirected and the subpoena should have been served on Harris and not on Twitter. Malcolm Harris is one of the 700 protesters arrested during last October’s government crackdown at Brooklyn Bridge.

Prosecutors from the Manhattan District Attorney’s office maintained that the personal information of Harris on Twitter and all of his tweets between Sept 15 to Dec 31 are required verify his stand that the police either led or escorted protesters into the roadway. Earlier, the Manhattan Criminal Court Judge, Matthew Sciarrino Jr had ruled that Harris did not have the locus standi to challenge the subpoena.

Privacy and speech activists hold that if the judge upholding the district attorney’s subpoena undermines a basic tenet of Internet communication of this age – that the author, and not the company whose services are used, is responsible for the content.

Get JD Journal in Your Mail
Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!




The brief submitted by ACLU on Thursday argues that Harris has the standing to bring a First Amendment challenge against the subpoena because it would reveal sensitive details about him and that the subpoena violates Harris’s Fourth Amendment right against warrantless search. With access to Twitter data, the government can “reconstruct their movements to conduct virtually 24 hours surveillance of them.”

The district attorney’s office submitted in its brief, “this claim is meritless because defendant has no reasonable expectation of privacy in information that he asked Twitter to publish to what is, after all, the world-wide web.”

Susan Freiwald, a professor of cyber law and information privacy at the University of San Francisco School of Law told Reuters, “Everything on the Internet is held by a third party …If you were to say that the third party rule retains force on the Internet, then we would have no privacy online.”

Twitter Subpoena Raises a Storm of Legal Questions by

Tagged:

Posted by on June 2, 2012. Filed under Business News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

 

 

Job of the Day
Health Supervising Attorney
USA-CA-Pacoima

Be a part of history; join the NLSLA Health Consumer Center (HCC) to lead a team of over 20 advocates that provide a wide-range of health focused advocacy in multiple forums including hotline consumer...

Related Posts: