- From: Robin Berjon <robin@robineko.com>
- Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 23:34:20 +0100
- To: Karl Dubost <karld@opera.com>
- Cc: "public-privacy (W3C mailing list)" <public-privacy@w3.org>
On Nov 11, 2011, at 22:56 , Karl Dubost wrote:
> This one is "funny"
> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/11/technology/twitter-ordered-to-yield-data-in-wikileaks-case.html?pagewanted=print
>
> The judge said that because Twitter users “voluntarily”
> turned over the Internet protocol addresses when they
> signed up for an account, they relinquished an
> expectation of privacy.
>
> “Petitioners knew or should have known that their I.P.
> information was subject to examination by Twitter, so
> they had a lessened expectation of privacy in that
> information, particularly in light of their apparent
> consent to the Twitter terms of service and privacy
> policy,” Judge O’Grady wrote.
Yes, this was also covered in the Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/11/us-verdict-privacy-wikileaks-twitter
I wonder if this should not warrant the filing of an amicus brief (assuming there'll be an appeal).
--
Robin Berjon
robineko — hired gun, higher standards
http://robineko.com/
@robinberjon
Received on Saturday, 12 November 2011 22:34:55 UTC