User Comments or Submissions

Issue relates to user comments or submissions on blogs, forums, and other websites.

Milo v. Martin

Date: 

01/01/2006

Threat Type: 

Lawsuit

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

Guy Martin, Sandy Martin, Bill Cochran, Jr., Melvin Douglas

Type of Party: 

Individual

Type of Party: 

Individual

Court Type: 

State

Court Name: 

284th District Court (Montgomery County) Texas; Court of Appeals of Texas, 9th District (Beaumont) (on appeal)

Case Number: 

06-10-10390 CV (trial); 09-09-00145-CV (on appeal)

Legal Counsel: 

John Paul Hopkins

Publication Medium: 

Website

Status: 

Concluded

Disposition: 

Dismissed (total)

Description: 

Walter Milo and Anthony Shelton sued Guy Martin, Bill Cochran, Melvin Douglas, and Sandy Martin, the editors and coordinator of The Conroe Watchdog (collectively "The Watchdog"), a website that describes itself as providing "[t]he unfiltered truth about Conroe politics and your tax dollars."

According to the court on appeal, Milo and Shelton sued for comments posted in October 2006 by anonymous users on a portion of the website titled "Guest Book." These comments referred to Shelton as a "pulpit pimp" and that he drove a $90,000 Hummer, according to the Houston Community Newspapers (HCN). Also according to HCN, the comments also contained allegations that Milo committed a drug crime in 2005 and "cut a deal" with the district attorney, reducing his sentence to probation.

The trial court granted The Watchdog's no-evidence motion for summary judgment in December 2008. The summary judgment was upheld by the Court of Appeals of Texas on April 29, 2010, which pointed to lack of evidence that the anonymous posts were created by The Watchdog and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. According to HCN, this case was the last of three lawsuits claiming defamation against The Watchdog to be resolved. Dixon v. Martin ended in July 2008 when a jury ruled for The Watchdog (see Legal Threat Entry) and a third lawsuit filed by Rigby Owen, Jr. was withdrawn in October 2009.

Jurisdiction: 

Content Type: 

Subject Area: 

Threat Source: 

Blog Post

Collins v. Federated Publications, Inc.

Date: 

02/09/2009

Threat Type: 

Lawsuit

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

Purdue University; Board of Trustees of Purdue University; Purdue University Police Department; Stephen J. Akers; Lyman (Trea) R. Mitten, III; Jeanne V. Norberg; Alice M. D'Amore; Jane Does; John Does; Gary K. Evans; John K. Cox; Carrie K. Costello;

Type of Party: 

Individual

Type of Party: 

Individual
Organization
Large Organization

Court Type: 

Federal

Court Name: 

United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana

Case Number: 

4:09-cv-12

Legal Counsel: 

Jan M Carroll, Kara M Kapke - Barnes & Thornburg LLP (for Federated Publications, Inc.); Christina A Wright, Trenten D Klingerman - Stuart & Branigin LLP (for Purdue, Akers, Mitten, Norberg, Evans, Cox, Costello, Davis, Wietbrock); Wayne T Szulkowski

Publication Medium: 

Social Network
Website

Relevant Documents: 

Status: 

Pending

Disposition: 

Dismissed (partial)

Description: 

Timothy Collins, a former student of Purdue University, sued Federated Publications, publisher of the Journal & Courier newspaper, Purdue University, university officials, and others over allegedly defamatory statements in an article published on the newspaper's website, in anonymous comments to that article, and on Facebook. 

According to court documents, the dispute revolved around a Journal & Courier article, "Student Who Reported Mugging Charged," which stated that Collins had been charged with misdemeanor false informing in connection with the investigation of the disappearance of another Purdue student.  Comments posted to the article and on Facebook allegedly linked Collins to the disappearance.  The complaint included claims for libel, false light, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligent infliction of emotional distress.  

Federated Publications moved for judgment on the pleadings, and the court granted dismissal of all claims against it.  The court found that claims based on certain statements were barred by the statute of limitations, that Collins failed to make out a claim for intentional or negligent infliction of emotional distress, that the Journal & Courier article was substantially true, and that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protected Federated for claims based on its users' comments.

Jurisdiction: 

Content Type: 

Subject Area: 

Roebuck v. Trib Total Media, Inc.

Date: 

01/12/2010

Threat Type: 

Lawsuit

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

Trib Total Media, Inc.; James Cuddy, Jr.; Frank Craig; John Doe a/k/a "None"

Type of Party: 

Individual

Type of Party: 

Individual
Organization

Court Type: 

State

Court Name: 

Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania

Case Number: 

GD-10-000727

Legal Counsel: 

Ronald Barber

Publication Medium: 

Forum

Relevant Documents: 

Status: 

Pending

Description: 

Karen Roebuck, a former employee of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, commenced legal action against Tribune-Review publisher Trib Total Media, two of its editors, and a John Doe defendant over comments posted to the unaffiliated VoyForums site,  self-described as "a forum to talk about issues affecting the Pittsburgh media scene."

Roebuck used an unusual procedure which allows her to commence the action using a "writ of summons" without filing a complaint.  In a motion to extend time to file a complaint, Roebuck indicated that she intends to bring a libel action based on two statements posted on VoyForums by an unknown person using the pseudonym "None."   The court granted Roebuck 60 days to conduct discovery in support of filing a complaint.

In February 2010, Roebuck served a subpoena on VoyForums seeking documents showing the IP address for "None."  VoyForums posted a notice on its forum indicating that it would comply with the subpoena unless someone came forward to file a motion to quash within 30 days.

Defendants Trib Total Media, Frank Craig, and James Cuddy filed a motion to quash the subpoena on March 26, 2010, and supplemented it with a brief on April 5. The brief argues that the subpoena is a "nullity" because it was served on VoyForums, which is based in California, without issuing from a California court.  It also argues that Roebuck has not made the showing required to unmask a pseudonymous speaker under Melvin v. Doe, 49 Pa. D. & C. 4th 449 (Allegh. Co. 2000).

Jurisdiction: 

Content Type: 

Subject Area: 

Kehoe v. Craigslist

Date: 

03/01/2010

Threat Type: 

Lawsuit

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

Craigslist, Inc.; Jane Doe

Type of Party: 

Individual

Type of Party: 

Individual
Organization

Court Type: 

State

Court Name: 

Supreme Court of the State of New York, Queens County

Publication Medium: 

Forum

Status: 

Pending

Disposition: 

Material Removed

Description: 

Leo Kehoe, a Queens accountant, sued Craigslist, Inc. in New York state court after an anonymous individual posted ads on Craigslist calling him a "crook" and a "fraudulent scumbag." Kehoe also sued the anonymous poster. According to Gothamist, the postings have since been removed and the following were posted in their place: "Leo Kehoe is a great CPA. He charged me a lower fee than what I had payed with someone else and he did a much better job" and "Leo Kehoe: Much better than Cats. I'm going to see him again and again."  These postings have expired.

Kehoe's lawyer told the Daily News: "Craigslist should have known the posting was false and untrue and would subject Kehoe to 'ridicule, disgrace and prejudice.'"  The claim against Craigslist will almost certainly be dismissed under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.

Jurisdiction: 

Content Type: 

Subject Area: 

"Fred Ross" Files Anti-SLAPP Motion Against Patterson City Attorney

A couple of weeks ago, my good friend and all-around First Amendment bad ass Marc Randazza called on a bunch of law bloggers to make March "Anti-SLAPP Month" in honor of Congressman Steve Cohen (D-TN)’s propos

Jurisdiction: 

Subject Area: 

George Logan v. Fred Ross

Date: 

01/07/2010

Threat Type: 

Lawsuit

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

Fred Ross; Does I-XX

Type of Party: 

Individual

Type of Party: 

Individual

Court Type: 

State

Court Name: 

Superior Court of the State of California, County of Merced

Case Number: 

CV000745

Publication Medium: 

Print
Website

Relevant Documents: 

Status: 

Pending

Description: 

In January 2010, George Logan, City Attorney for Patterson, California, filed a lawsuit against John Doe defendants individually and collectively referring to themselves as "Fred Ross" over statements appearing on the Patterson IrriTator website and in comments posted to the Patterson Irrigator's website. According to the complaint, filed in California state court, the statements in question asserted that Logan was "in the pocket of developers" and a "joke."  The complaint includes claims for libel and conspiracy to libel.

A post on the Patterson IrriTator recommends that readers refrain from posting comments on the website "if you are concerned about your identity being revealed."

Update: 

03/10/2010-Fred Ross filed a motion to strike the complaint under California's anti-SLAPP law.

Jurisdiction: 

Content Type: 

Subject Area: 

Pennsylvania Court Refuses to Unmask News Website Commenters

Thomas O'Toole at TechLaw points us to an anonymous speech decision issued last week by a federal court in Pennsylvania.  In McVicker v.

Jurisdiction: 

Subject Area: 

Dunne v. Lara

Date: 

05/22/2008

Threat Type: 

Lawsuit

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

Charles Lara

Type of Party: 

Individual

Type of Party: 

Individual

Court Type: 

State

Court Name: 

Superior Court of the State of California, Santa Barbara County; Court of Appeal of the State of California, Second Appellate District, Division Six

Case Number: 

1267944 (trial level); B 210779 (appellate level)

Legal Counsel: 

Patric Weddle - Law office of Patric H.R. Weddle

Publication Medium: 

Forum

Relevant Documents: 

Status: 

Pending

Description: 

In 2008, Dunne, the owner of a motorcycle repair shop in Santa Barbara sued Lara, a former customer, who published statements about the shop on DucatiSpot, a forum for Ducati motorcyle enthusiasts.  According to court documents, Lara allegedly posted comments falsely suggesting that the repair shop had been operating without required registrations and that it had been raided by the FBI.

Lara moved to strike the complaint under California's anti-SLAPP statute (Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16).  The trial court denied the motion and Lara appealed.  On appeal, in November 2009, the California Court of Appeal, Second District, held that Lara's statements were not entitled to the protection of the anti-SLAPP statute because they were not connected to an issue of public interest.  The court reasoned that Lara's comments "expressed only personal dissatisfaction about a single service provider and were not connected to an ongoing discussion on an issue of broader public interest."  Dunne v. Lara, 2009 WL 3808345 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 16, 2009).

Jurisdiction: 

Content Type: 

Subject Area: 

Priority: 

1-High

Will Italy's Conviction of Google Execs Stick?

I've no doubt that CMLP blog readers, fellow netizens that you are, are well aware of an Italian court's conviction last week of three Google executives for invasion of privacy of an Italian teenager. 

Jurisdiction: 

Content Type: 

Subject Area: 

USA Technologies v. Doe

Date: 

08/27/2009

Threat Type: 

Lawsuit

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

John Doe a.k.a. "Stokklerk"; John Doe "Michael_Moore_Is_Fat

Type of Party: 

Organization

Type of Party: 

Individual

Court Type: 

Federal

Court Name: 

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania; United States District Court for the Northern District of California

Case Number: 

09-3899 (Pennsylvania); 3:09-mc-80275-SI (California)

Legal Counsel: 

Matthew Zimmerman - EFF; David M. Given, Nicholas A. Carlin - Phillips & Erlewine & Given LLP; (for John Doe "Stokklerk")

Publication Medium: 

Forum

Relevant Documents: 

Status: 

Pending

Disposition: 

Subpoena Quashed

Description: 

In August 2009, USA Technologies, Inc. sued two "John Doe" defendants in Pennsylvania federal court over critical comments posted on the Yahoo! Finance message board dedicated to the company. According to EFF, the pseudonymous commenters

criticized what they claim is the consistently poor performance of USA Technologies' management. The criticism highlighted plummeting stock prices of the company as well as the high compensation rates for management of the company that has been consistently unprofitable.

Seeking the identity of the posters, USA Technologies obtained court permission to serve a subpoena on Yahoo! in California.  With the assistance of EFF, one of the commenters, John Doe "Stokklerk," filed a motion to quash the subpoena. 

In December 2009, after a hearing, the federal court in California granted the motion to quash the subpoena. Under Cal. Civ. Proc. § 1987.2, USA Technologies may be required to pay John Doe's attorneys' fees incurred in bringing the motion to quash, but there is no court order on attorneys' fees yet. 

Jurisdiction: 

Content Type: 

Subject Area: 

CMLP Notes: 

HF Reviewing 11/2

Priority: 

1-High

Stone v. Hipcheck16

Date: 

04/01/2009

Threat Type: 

Subpoena

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

Paddock Publications, Inc., d/b/a The Daily Herald; Hipcheck16

Type of Party: 

Individual

Type of Party: 

Organization

Court Type: 

State

Court Name: 

Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois

Case Number: 

2009L005636

Legal Counsel: 

Michael Furlong (for Hipcheck16)

Publication Medium: 

Website

Relevant Documents: 

Status: 

Pending

Disposition: 

Subpoena Enforced

Description: 

In November 2009, an Illinois Circuit Court judge ruled that Buffalo Grove Village Trustee Lisa Stone was entitled to pre-suit discovery of the identity of "Hipcheck16," an anonymous commenter who allegedly defamed her son in the comments section of a Daily Herald article.  The comments in question arose in the course of a heated political debate between Hipcheck16 and Ms. Stone's son:

The comments at the heart of the case came at the end of a series of posts between Hipcheck16 and Stone's son, who was concerned about online remarks the teen regarded as critical of his mother.

At one point, the teen asked to know the poster's identity and challenged him to debate the issues in person.

Declining an invitation to pay a visit, Hipcheck16 posted a response that said, according to court documents, "Seems like you're very willing to invite a man you only know from the Internet over to your house -- have you done it before, or do they usually invite you to their house?"

The post then continues with references to the boy's "mommy," saying that statements made by her son may cause her political problems after her election, according to court records. (Chicago Breaking News)

According to Chicago Breaking News, the newspaper turned over Hipcheck16's IP address, and Stone sought his identity from Comcast.  Although the record is not entirely clear, it looks like counsel for Hipcheck16 then intervened and sought a protective order, which the court denied in November 2009, though the court ruled that only Stone and a process server—should she file eventually file a lawsuit—could learn of Hipcheck16's identity.  

Later in November, the court granted a stay of the order for a month, to give Michael Furlong, Hipcheck16's lawyer, time to appeal.  Furlong told Chicago Breaking News that he intended to appeal.

Update:

03/15/2010 - EFF and The Media Freedom and Information Access Practicum filed an amicus curiae brief in support of Hipcheck16's appeal.

Jurisdiction: 

Content Type: 

Subject Area: 

Priority: 

1-High

The Double-Edged Sword of Online Free Speech

From a functional perspective, I think that the First Amendment is the most important amendment in the bunch, because it ensures that the people can denounce any injustices the government perpetrates.  To be sure, various other amendments bar greater evils than censorship—the Thirteenth Amendment ban of slavery springs to mind as an obvious example.  But I'd argue that, without the First Amendment, banning su

Subject Area: 

Clem v. Richmond Register

Date: 

08/25/2008

Threat Type: 

Subpoena

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

Richmond Register

Type of Party: 

Individual

Type of Party: 

Media Company

Court Type: 

State

Court Name: 

Madison Circuit Court

Case Number: 

08-CI-01296

Legal Counsel: 

Kenyon Meyer

Publication Medium: 

Website

Status: 

Pending

Description: 

A Kentucky college student who was kicked out of a mall for wearing a short dress issued a subpoena to the Richmond Register seeking the identity of an anonymous poster on the newspaper's website.  The subpoena was issued in connection with a case filed in Kentucky state court against the anonymous commenter for allegedly posting a defamatory comment about her on the Richmond Register's site on Aug. 13, 2008, under a story about the mall incident. According to the complaint, the commenter, identified only as 12bme, claimed Clem was kicked out because she exposed herself to another woman and her children. 

The newspaper subsequently deleted the comment and banned 12bme from the site for violating the site's terms of service. According to the Student Press Law Center, the newspaper opposed Clem's subpoena, claiming that the identity of the commenter  should fall under the Kentucky's reporter shield law because a Register reporter wrote an article about the lawsuit, which mentioned the comment.

Jurisdiction: 

Content Type: 

Subject Area: 

CMLP Notes: 

6/28/09 AVM - court website has no images, nothing in W, similar to the LVR case 

6/24/09 CMF

Priority: 

1-High

Clem v. Doe

Date: 

08/25/2008

Threat Type: 

Lawsuit

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

John Doe a/k/a 12bme

Type of Party: 

Individual

Type of Party: 

Individual

Court Type: 

State

Court Name: 

Madison Circuit Court

Case Number: 

08-CI-01296

Publication Medium: 

Website

Relevant Documents: 

Status: 

Pending

Description: 

On August 25, 2008, a Kentucky college student who was kicked out of a mall for wearing a short dress filed suit in Kentucky state court against an anonymous commenter for allegedly posting a defamatory comment about her on a newspaper's website.  According to news reports, the comment appeared on the Richmond Register's site on Aug. 13, 2008, under a story about the mall incident. According to the complaint, the commenter, identified only as 12bme, claimed Clem was kicked out because she exposed herself to another woman and her children. 

The newspaper subsequently deleted the comment and banned 12bme from the site for violating the site's terms of service. Clem filed suit against 12bme and subpoenaed the Register for the identity of the poster. According to the Student Press Law Center, the newspaper opposed Clem's subpoena, claiming that the identity of the commenter  should fall under the Kentucky's reporter shield law because a Register reporter wrote an article about the lawsuit, which mentioned the comment.

Jurisdiction: 

Content Type: 

Subject Area: 

CMLP Notes: 

6/28/09 AVM - court website has no images, nothing in W, similar to the LVR case 

6/24/09 CMF

Priority: 

1-High

Myrtle Beach Area Chamber of Commerce v. "Elmer Fudd"

Date: 

09/04/2009

Threat Type: 

Lawsuit

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

John Doe a.k.a "Elmer Fudd"

Type of Party: 

Organization

Type of Party: 

Individual

Court Type: 

State

Court Name: 

Horry County Court of Common Pleas, South Carolina

Legal Counsel: 

Pro Se

Publication Medium: 

Website

Status: 

Pending

Disposition: 

Subpoena Enforced

Description: 

On September 4, 2009, the Myrtle Beach Area Chamber of Commerce sued  "Elmer Fudd," an anonymous commenter on TheSunNews.com.  From Popehat (quoting the original Sun News article that is no longer available):

The posts, which appeared on the comment sections of several stories last month, claimed the Horry County Sheriff's Department had conducted raids at the chamber and other businesses. The posts also claimed that computers were seized from those businesses, although a sheriff’s department spokesman said no raids occurred and no computers were seized.

"The claims were absolutely false," said Cherie Blackburn, a lawyer representing the chamber of commerce. Blackburn termed the posts "a vicious cyber defamation campaign" in court documents filed Friday in Conway.

The publisher of TheSunNews.com notified "Elmer Fudd" that, pursuant to a subpoeana, she would reveal his identity to the Chamber unless he objected to the subpoena. The newspaper is not a party to the suit. "Elmer Fudd" filed a motion protesting the release of his information, arguing that the subpoena violated his First Amendment right to speak anonymously and that he did not have sufficient time to find an attorney.  Fudd did not appear through an attorney at a December hearing on the Chamber's motion to compel disclosure of his identifying information.

According to TheSunNews.com, the court signed an order on December 4 compelling it to turn over identifying information to the Chamber.  The SunNews.com did not have records identifying the poster's name, but turned over an email address "noadtax@gmail.com."  (There appears to be a related facebook page, No Ad Tax.)

TheSunNews.com reported on December 5 that Grand Strand Chamber of Commerce founder Ward Shepherd named former Myrtle Beach Mayor Mark McBride as "Elmer Fudd," after being subpoenaed by an attorney for the Myrtle Beach Area Chamber.

Jurisdiction: 

Content Type: 

Subject Area: 

CMLP Notes: 

-MW reviewing 10/. cannot find court documents. 

Priority: 

1-High

Office Space Star Ron Livingston Sues Wikipedia Prankster, Community Norms At Issue

Maybe I'm a big dork, but I think Office Space is a totally hilarious movie.  And based on his starring role in the film, I would assume that actor Ron Livingston has a pretty good sense of humor.  But apparently not so, at least when it comes to web 2.0 technologies and his personal life.

Jurisdiction: 

Subject Area: 

Zuleger v. Klocko

Date: 

04/01/2009

Threat Type: 

Correspondence

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

Paul Klocko

Type of Party: 

Individual

Type of Party: 

Individual

Publication Medium: 

Forum

Relevant Documents: 

Status: 

Pending

Description: 

Dean Zuleger, the Village Administrator in Weston, Wisconsin, sent a letter to Paul Klocko, a local businessman, demanding that he cease making anonymous derogatory statements about him on the website for the Wausau Daily Herald.  Klocko had posted his comments on the Daily Herald's website after Zuleger was named Person of the Year by the paper.  According to the Associated Press:

Readers anonymously flooded the Wausau Daily Herald's Web site with comments bashing Zuleger's salary, his management style, his weight. One person suggested his third chin should have been nominated.

''I have just two words for Dean Zuleger, and they are ... A) anger management. B) salad bar. C) Rod Blagojevich. D) all of the above. The correct answer is D.,'' one posting read.

Zuleger asked the Daily Herald for the identity of the user behind the comments, and the newspaper complied with his request by releasing the e-mail address associated with Klocko's username.  Zuleger contacted the Daily Herald and demanded to know the identify of the commenter and the paper handed over one critic's e-mail address.

Zuleger then sent a letter on his official stationery, telling Klocko to stop the personal attacks and ''come out from behind the cloak'' and meet him.

The Daily Herald later apologized to Klocko for revealing his identity and the paper's corporate parent, Gannett Co., has clarified its policies on anonymous speech, stating that it will release information only if ordered by a court or if a comment contains a threat of imminent harm.

No lawsuit has been filed.

Jurisdiction: 

Content Type: 

Subject Area: 

CMLP Notes: 

EK - editing [11/28/09]

Priority: 

1-High

Darnell v. Dobrott

Date: 

06/10/2008

Threat Type: 

Lawsuit

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

Heather Dobrott

Type of Party: 

Individual

Type of Party: 

Individual

Court Type: 

Federal

Court Name: 

193rd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas

Case Number: 

No. 08-06317

Verdict or Settlement Amount: 

$0.00

Legal Counsel: 

Matthew J. Kita; James H. Moody III; Thomas Foster

Publication Medium: 

Forum

Relevant Documents: 

Status: 

Concluded

Disposition: 

Dismissed (total)
Injunction Denied

Description: 

In June 2008, Tim Darnell of Advantage Conferences sued Heather Dobrott in Texas state court for comments she posted about his business under the pseudonym "soapboxmom" on forum site scam.com and other websites.  Darnell's petition and request for temporary restraining order sought injunctive relief and damages against Dobrott on theories of defamation, trade libel, tortious interference, negligence, and invasion of privacy.  

The court initially granted Darnell a temporary restraining order, but in a June 23, 2008 hearing it dissolved the restraining order and denied Darnell's request for a temporary injunction, stating that "prior restraints on speech are presumptively unconstitutional and I have not heard anything that would indicate . . . why the relief requested would take it out of that presumption."

Later, the court granted Dobrott's motion for summary judgment, which appears to have been unopposed.

Jurisdiction: 

Content Type: 

Subject Area: 

United States v. Weaver

Date: 

06/11/2009

Threat Type: 

Criminal Charge

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

Jeffrey Lynn Weaver

Type of Party: 

Government

Type of Party: 

Individual

Court Type: 

Federal

Court Name: 

United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia

Case Number: 

7:09-cr-00032

Legal Counsel: 

Fay Francis Spence (Federal Public Defender's Office WDVA); LLoyd Bradford Bradford (L. Brad Bradford P.C.)

Publication Medium: 

Website

Relevant Documents: 

Status: 

Pending

Disposition: 

Convicted

Description: 

On June 11, 2009, Jeffrey Weaver was criminally indicted for statements he posted to InfoWars.com that threatened a California transit police officer and threatened the officer's family.  InfoWars.com is a website run by talk radio host Alex Jones.

According to the affidavit by the FBI officer who investigated the case, on January 7, 2009, an anonymous poster using the name "FuckThePIGS" posted a comment on InfoWars.com that identified Officer Johannes Mehserle by name and address, and made threatening statements about killing officer Mehserle and his wife and baby.  Officer Mehserle is a former Bay Area Transit Authority (BART) officer who has been criminally charged for a controversial shooting in January, 2009, that was caught on video.

Using IP records provided by an InfoWars administrator, the FBI was able to identify the poster as Jeffery Weaver, of Roanoke, Virginia.  Weaver was indicted in the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia.

On August 14, 2009, Weaver pleaded guilty to one count of transmitting in interstate commerce a threat to injure a person, as well as one count of willful copyright infringement.  His sentencing hearing is set for December 14, 2009.

Jurisdiction: 

Content Type: 

Subject Area: 

CMLP Notes: 

RB 11/12/09- No info available in docket about the copyright infrigement charge.  Likely arose out of something found on his computer which was confiscated in the search.  

Priority: 

1-High

Florida v. Brayshaw

Date: 

05/01/2008

Threat Type: 

Criminal Charge

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

Robert A. Brayshaw

Type of Party: 

Government

Type of Party: 

Individual

Court Type: 

State

Legal Counsel: 

James Green

Publication Medium: 

Forum

Relevant Documents: 

Status: 

Concluded

Disposition: 

Dismissed (total)
Subpoena Enforced

Description: 

Florida state authorities charged Robert Brayshaw with a misdemeanor for violating Fla. Stat. § 843.17 after he anonymously posted the name, address, and telephone number of a Tallahassee Police Department officer on RateMyCop.com.  Section 843.17 prohibits publication of a law enforcement officer's residential address or telephone number with the intent to intimidate, hinder, or interrupt any law enforcement officer in the legal performance of his or her duties.  The Tallahassee police obtained Brayshaw's identity after subpoenaing records from RateMyCop.com and Brayshaw's ISP, according to Wired.

Prosecutors voluntarily dropped the charges on December 9 and then refiled 10 days later, according to an article on RateMyCop.com. The state court judge ultimately dismissed the charges with prejudice for failure to comply with Florida's speedy trial requirements. Brayshaw then filed a complaint in federal court in Florida, seeking a declaration that Section 843.17 violates the First Amendment. According to Brayshaw's complaint, the police officer's name and address are publicly available on the Leon County Clerk of Court's website.  On April 30, 2010, Judge Smoak issued a decision striking down Section 843.17 as unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

Jurisdiction: 

Content Type: 

Subject Area: 

CMLP Notes: 

EK - editing [10/23/2009]

EK - updating [11/13/2009]; also look at related entry State of Florida v. Ratemycop.com

Priority: 

1-High

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - User Comments or Submissions