Feb 132012
 February 13, 2012  Posted by  Court, Featured News, Online

Courts have generally been reluctant to allow parties to file anonymously – even when it might seem reasonable to us to allow them to do.  As a recent example: the actress who tried to anonymously sue IMDB and Amazon for “outing” her real age was told she could either file non-anonymously or drop her suit.

When “Does” are being sued, you’d think – or hope – that the court would allow them to move to quash subpoenas anonymously to protect their anonymity – at least in the early stages. And that’s how one case started out. But D.C. District Court magistrate John M. Facciola apparently had second thoughts and issued an order saying that if defendants wanted to move to quash, they’d have to do so under their names, which would be available in the public docket.

Citizen Media Law Project has more on the case, Hard Drive Production v. DOES 1-1,495.

Did I ever mention how much I detest Third Party Doctrine and why Congress really really really needs to recognize the privacy interests of those who provide subscriber information to sites and ISPs?

Carousel image © Michelisola | Dreamstime.com

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.