Judge Rules Twitter Must Turn Over Occupy Protester's Messages
Monday, July 02, 2012 - 03:05 PM
An interesting technological case has emerged from the Occupy Wall Street protests of last fall. At issue is whether prosectors can simply subpoena the tweets of Malcom Harris, one of about 700 protesters arrested last year while walking on the Brooklyn Bridge.
Manhattan Criminal Court Judge Matthew A. Sciarrino Jr. had already ruled on this once before saying Harris had no jurisdiction to challenge the subpoena because his tweets belonged to Twitter.
The social media company then stepped in and challenged the subpoena on behalf of Harris. Part of their argument was whether authorties would need a judge-issued warrant to attain Twitter records and another part of their argument was that giving Twitter jurisdiction of users' tweets means the company would have to fight on behalf of their users, which is expensive and burdensome.
Sciarrino decided Twitter should be the one with legal standing and that Tweeting is not private.
"If you post a tweet, just like if you scream it out the window, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy," Sciarrino wrote in his opinion. "There is no proprietary interest in your tweets, which you have now gifted to the world. This is not the same as a private email, a private direct message, a private chat, or any of the other readily available ways to have a private conversation via the internet that now exist. Those private dialogues would require a warrant based on probable cause in order to access the relevant information."
Prosecutors, by the way, wanted Harris' tweets because they think they can prove he knew police did not want them on the roadway when he was arrested.
Reuters Anthony De Rosa obtained this statement from Twitter:
"We are disappointed in the judge's decision and are considering our options. Twitter's Terms of Service have long made it absolutely clear that its users *own* their content. We continue to have a steadfast commitment to our users and their rights."
9(MDA2Mzg3MDUxMDEyODg5NzcwMDhkODJjMA001))
Source: NPR
Comments [1]
so what if he knew the cops didn't want them on the bridge? that's ridiculous. i'm sure everyone was pretty well aware they weren't allowed on the bridge when they got there and saw such a grotesque police turnout. I'm sure at least a few of them besides Mr. Harris had a HUNCH that thousands of demonstrators weren't going to be allowed to break too far out from their little Zucotti box. that's called civil disobedience. are they trying to find Malcom Harris guilty of civil disobedience? not necessary, since they decided he was guilty the moment they threw cuffs on him.
I wish we could seize the intellectual property of some of the fat cat bankers who caused this economic turmoil to prove (laugh!) that they KNEW and WERE AWARE that their actions were going to result in huge losses for the poor.
Poor Malcom Harris made one mistake as far as I'm concerned, and that was ever using twitter in the first place. that idiotic, vain, materialistic form of "communication" is a contradiction to the independence from big brotherly influence that Occupy was all about. You say something on twitter, and you have to pretend you're saying it right to bloomberg, kelly, obama, etc., as they sit twiddling their thumbs on the other side of the desk just waiting for you to say something they can take you down for, or fine you for, or smear your movement with. it's risky enough just opening your mouth and speaking in this horrible world, but you f'd up when you tweeted it, bro. sorry, but that's the breaks. i don't agree with it, but I hope twitter and facebook users take a lesson from this, and that lesson is NOT to refrain from walking across the Brooklyn Bridge and getting arrested. that is fighting for rights. but not to trust mass digital communication to keep you safe or private for even a second. you think it's a miraculous modern tool of organizing? then don't be surprised when the powers that be find it a miraculous tool for surveillance and oppression.
there was a time in this country when being counter-culture meant finding your way OFF THE GRID as much as possible. what happened to us?
Leave a Comment
Register for your own account so you can vote on comments, save your favorites, and more. Learn more.
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. We reserve the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the Comment Guidelines before posting. By leaving a comment, you agree to New York Public Radio's Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use.