A reader poll: What would you have done about a federal subpoena for online reader comments?
By now you may have heard that the Review-Journal was subpoenaed for information — names, addresses, IP addresses, credit card numbers, etc. — about people who posted online comments about a story that appeared in the paper last month.
The story was about a businessman who is on trial, accused of tax fraud for paying contractors with gold and silver coins based on their precious metal value but using the much smaller face value for tax purposes. At last count there were 175 comments appended to the story.
I revealed the existence of the subponea in a Sunday column. There was a follow up story in today's paper.
Since then there has been a lot of talk about what the paper should do in response to the subpoena. The ACLU is involved. Lots of attorneys for both sides are involved.
It is a fundamental First Amendment vs. vs. Fourth Amendment s. Sixth Amendment issue.
Emotions are running high.
This entry was posted on Tuesday, Jun. 16, 2009 at 01:16 PM
and is filed under Thomas Mitchell.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response.
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
42
Responses
to "A reader poll: What would you have done about a federal subpoena for online reader comments?"
Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from responsibility for what is said. Speaking out in public is a right, if not a civic duty, but anonymous attacks and criticism should not be shielded by newspapers or supposed First Amendment rights, such as those granted to journalists protecting sources.
I don't see other comments. Is this request by the Federal government now perceived as a threat to those that care to voice their opinion? Then the supeona is clearly a violation of our Freedom of Speech. Does the Federal government have probable cause (4th amendment) and need witnesses for their case (6th amendment)? Probably so. Then, Mr. Prosecutor, be specific and ask for only those who admitted to criminal acts. Don't come after me just because I have an opinion. I never respond to these venues for fear of retaliation of my opinion, but right now I am in fear of taking one more step toward losing my Right to speak at all without fear of prejudice. ~Jo~Georgia
What is the purpose of getting the IP addresses of readers who commented about this case. The reporting was picked up by the AP and other news sources? The indictment is a matter of public record.
I do not think there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in a comment posted on a public website and I do not believe that the newspaper reporter can be allowed to determine unilaterally what information can be revealed in response to a subpoena. I am not an expert in Constitutional law, so I appreciate there may be a middle ground, but I believe there are probably already some fairly well established guidelines in this area.
Isnt this what the Nevada Shield Law is for? If it's not a threat... it's a comment. Simple as that. Fight it all the way.
Big brother is watching us? You should have a RIGHT to say whatever you want about whatever you want as long as you don't threaten to harm anyone/break the law or use hate speech. There has to be limits and if you go beyond those boundries you should be scoped out by the cops for questioning!
Dear readers: Guidelines are not well established. This is fairly new terriotry.
The Nevada shield law is not applicable in federal court.
The Nevada shield law is not applicable in federal court.
What a great way by the government to silence those of us who refuse to agree with everything they want to do to us.
One easy way to avoid this type of mess is to not log IP addresses or email addresses.
Then you can answer the subpeona with a list of goofy made up phony names because those are the only records you have.
Then you can answer the subpeona with a list of goofy made up phony names because those are the only records you have.
I think that the RJ should not provide a forum for the posting of ANY comments to a story. I would delegate that to a separate online forum.
Too frequently people post hateful and irresponsible comments and hide behind anonymity. Simply put, many adults are not responsible enough to be given a public platform.
Too frequently people post hateful and irresponsible comments and hide behind anonymity. Simply put, many adults are not responsible enough to be given a public platform.
Separate from why would the RJ have access to credit card numbers of posters, (unless they subscribe)
it appears yet another, heavy handed scare tactic on the part of our government.
Then there's the problem of judges, themselves, http://usajudges.blogspot.com/
(blog birthed today.)
it appears yet another, heavy handed scare tactic on the part of our government.
Then there's the problem of judges, themselves, http://usajudges.blogspot.com/
(blog birthed today.)
It's rather amusing how the old dictum about power seems to apply to all of us, even those of us who think we are super special because we are US Attorneys.
Fight the punk and make some good caselaw.
Fight the punk and make some good caselaw.
Subpoena This...
How funny, the Sun gets a Pulitzer, the RJ a subpoena, and they are both very happy about it. Will T. Mitchel add it to the front page the way the Sun did?
Sadly in this day and age with just this year dead police officers, doctors and shooting at the Holocaust memorial, when the speech crosses the line and the paper doesn't filter the comment the paper then assumes some responsibility. One letter doesn't, in my opinion, give law enforcement the right to investigate everyone that made a comment on a given subject. Nor should the paper feel threatened to self censor. The paper should understand it and people should understand this is public speech with many ears, or eyes, listening. There is no guarrentee to privacy that I am aware of, I am not a lawyer.
Congrats RJ on the Subpoena! I look forward to seeing it on the front page.
Sadly in this day and age with just this year dead police officers, doctors and shooting at the Holocaust memorial, when the speech crosses the line and the paper doesn't filter the comment the paper then assumes some responsibility. One letter doesn't, in my opinion, give law enforcement the right to investigate everyone that made a comment on a given subject. Nor should the paper feel threatened to self censor. The paper should understand it and people should understand this is public speech with many ears, or eyes, listening. There is no guarrentee to privacy that I am aware of, I am not a lawyer.
Congrats RJ on the Subpoena! I look forward to seeing it on the front page.
With a lot of slandeous comments made on the message boards (you know which one I am taking about) and numeous complaints with the webmaster doing absoultely nothing about it I am in favor of turning the IP over to the prosecution. If the LVRJ was made aware of the comments prior to and did nothing then they are liable.
People need to realize that what is posted on the internet is similar to what is shouted in the street. Free speech is not absolute.
A public comment is not the same as a letter to the editor, or a confidential source.
If a judge has sufficient cause to issue a subpoena, I find little reason why a poster should remain anonymous, or why a public forum should endeavor to keep a poster anonymous.
I comment regularly to the RJ, and have no illusion that I am in any way protected by the newspapers constitutional protections.
That said, a business does have some responsibilities to protect it's customers. Barring a valid subpoena, there is an expectation that names and private information won't be shared, except as agreed to in a privacy statement.
In this case, it seems the subpoena is overly broad. It is overreaching to including posters who made no comments of a nature that would cause a subpoena to be issued. The inclusion of credit card or similar non-identifying information, seems out of line.
I hope the RJ will seek to have the subpoena redefined to make it a more accurate and credible action.
A public comment is not the same as a letter to the editor, or a confidential source.
If a judge has sufficient cause to issue a subpoena, I find little reason why a poster should remain anonymous, or why a public forum should endeavor to keep a poster anonymous.
I comment regularly to the RJ, and have no illusion that I am in any way protected by the newspapers constitutional protections.
That said, a business does have some responsibilities to protect it's customers. Barring a valid subpoena, there is an expectation that names and private information won't be shared, except as agreed to in a privacy statement.
In this case, it seems the subpoena is overly broad. It is overreaching to including posters who made no comments of a nature that would cause a subpoena to be issued. The inclusion of credit card or similar non-identifying information, seems out of line.
I hope the RJ will seek to have the subpoena redefined to make it a more accurate and credible action.
"Fought it to the highest court in the land even if bankrupts the company and lands me in jail?"
Thomas,,, please...
This is the best thing that could happen to the RJ! Don't look a gift horse in the mouth. The longer the RJ `fights' this and keeps it in the news the more the RJ picks up free National advertising that money can't buy. This whole issue, if played correctly, HAS to be picked up and debated on the cable news as well as print media (please,, call FOX).
As far as costs, use your in-house legal folks and the pro-bono offer from the ACLU.
(Has anyone contacted Obama and Reid yet. Those two will be good for a laugh)
Thomas,,, please...
This is the best thing that could happen to the RJ! Don't look a gift horse in the mouth. The longer the RJ `fights' this and keeps it in the news the more the RJ picks up free National advertising that money can't buy. This whole issue, if played correctly, HAS to be picked up and debated on the cable news as well as print media (please,, call FOX).
As far as costs, use your in-house legal folks and the pro-bono offer from the ACLU.
(Has anyone contacted Obama and Reid yet. Those two will be good for a laugh)
Its a sad day when the Orwellian thought police take over. What about comments on Huffington Post or Daily Kos? they are worse?
If the powers that be attempt to take our first amendment rights, they will be met with our second amendment rights. It is so easy to find the home address of these government thugs.
Ding Dong- Have a nice day. :)
Free Hal Turner.
Ding Dong- Have a nice day. :)
Free Hal Turner.
Something doesn't pass the smell test here. I read through the blogs and came across nothing unusual or atypical of what appears in many of these semi-uncensored RJ blogs (Actually, the blogs for the tax story were quite mild compared against the racist, anti-Obama, anti-Metro, anti-teacher, anti-State employee comments on other stories)
The Feds must be on to something (Maybe one of those bloggers has the same writing style as that of a terrorist?,, i.e. the Unibomber)
Most of the anti-tax crowd are somewhat undeducated, white red-necks, usually in the gaming or construction industries (Sorry, but that is the profile). Mostly `bark' but no `bite'
Again, this whole thing should prove interesting and chart new legal territory. (Note to RJ- Take the earlier poster's advice and play this for all it's worth. This is great advertising and fodder for the talking heads on far right radio and cable)
The Feds must be on to something (Maybe one of those bloggers has the same writing style as that of a terrorist?,, i.e. the Unibomber)
Most of the anti-tax crowd are somewhat undeducated, white red-necks, usually in the gaming or construction industries (Sorry, but that is the profile). Mostly `bark' but no `bite'
Again, this whole thing should prove interesting and chart new legal territory. (Note to RJ- Take the earlier poster's advice and play this for all it's worth. This is great advertising and fodder for the talking heads on far right radio and cable)
Words have meaning and consequences. If you do damage with what you say you shouldn't be able to hide behind an IP address.
This isn't really new ground although admittedly all previous cases I could think of involved civil cases where a plaintiff is trying to get personal information regarding internet posters and not the government looking to prosecute individuals. A motion to quash is the best avenue and it should be appealed to whatever level necessary to get the motion granted. In previous civil cases motion to quash have been granted and the posters retained their anonymity except in cases where the plaintiff could prove a likelihood that they would prevail in the case. Until that likelihood is proven, posters remain anonymous to the plaintiff. See To the Mart Inc. vs John Does 1-100. To translate that to this case it would seem unless the government could prove that a poster made a direct threat or broke some sort of law, the anonymity of the posters should be retained.
This isn't really new ground although admittedly all previous cases I could think of involved civil cases where a plaintiff is trying to get personal information regarding internet posters and not the government looking to prosecute individuals. A motion to quash is the best avenue and it should be appealed to whatever level necessary to get the motion granted. In previous civil cases motion to quash have been granted and the posters retained their anonymity except in cases where the plaintiff could prove a likelihood that they would prevail in the case. Until that likelihood is proven, posters remain anonymous to the plaintiff. See To the Mart Inc. vs John Does 1-100. To translate that to this case it would seem unless the government could prove that a poster made a direct threat or broke some sort of law, the anonymity of the posters should be retained.
The subpoena seems overly broad and unenforceable. A request for the information associated with a single comment may be appropriate depending on content. This isn't an issue of freedom of the press, but rather it reeks of Orwellian privacy violations amounting to neighbors ratting out neighbors. Unless the grand jury narrows the scope of information requested, the RJ may need to become an unwilling champion of civil rights.
Turn on the proxy.
The odds that someone was such an idiot to post a threat and have a static IP (and not use a proxy)is low.
Sounds like the DA is trying to put the fear of God into the Tax Protestor movement (This group isn't known for a high IQ). Other than spouting their typical reasons tax is illegal, which fails in Court after Court (sorry, there is a 13th amendment and Title 26 of the USC), I didn't see anything in those blogs that were any worse than the rest of the blogs.
Sounds like the DA is trying to put the fear of God into the Tax Protestor movement (This group isn't known for a high IQ). Other than spouting their typical reasons tax is illegal, which fails in Court after Court (sorry, there is a 13th amendment and Title 26 of the USC), I didn't see anything in those blogs that were any worse than the rest of the blogs.
I wouldn't give up the commenter's info, but at the same time, the RJ should do a better job of comment moderation.
Letting commenter’s have immoderate access to your site compromises your integrity. I almost never read the RJ online anymore because seeing the comments is like reading the minutes from the most recent KKK rally.
The most hateful and vile people permeate the comments section of your website and it truly makes you look bad as an organization to allow those comments to persist.
Letting commenter’s have immoderate access to your site compromises your integrity. I almost never read the RJ online anymore because seeing the comments is like reading the minutes from the most recent KKK rally.
The most hateful and vile people permeate the comments section of your website and it truly makes you look bad as an organization to allow those comments to persist.
A “eureka” moment!
Now I get it! One of those IP addresses will be that of the Federal prison that the other nutjob tax protestor Irwin Schiff is at. Somehow, that old fart got on to a computer and posted these anti-tax code diatribes about why taxes are unconstitutional (I love the one about how dollars are not backed by gold and not real. (Please give me a million of those unreal dollars)). This will no doubt cause his sentence to be extended.
Now I get it! One of those IP addresses will be that of the Federal prison that the other nutjob tax protestor Irwin Schiff is at. Somehow, that old fart got on to a computer and posted these anti-tax code diatribes about why taxes are unconstitutional (I love the one about how dollars are not backed by gold and not real. (Please give me a million of those unreal dollars)). This will no doubt cause his sentence to be extended.
Give me a break! Now I suppose I'll have to get all my records together for an IRS audit. Such nonsense!
The FEDs are out of control terrorists! The IRS and its minions are evil. Wake up America... I'm sure I'm going to receive a subpoena, because naturally if I disagree with the govt and the IRS, then I am the terrorist! lol That's sarcasm for you inept IRS jerks!
The govt and IRS already lost this case! They sure are sore losers. I pray the jury will acquit the defendants (VICTIMS).
Recall that a large part of the First American Revolutuon had to do with taxes and illegal, anonymous pamphlets and broadsides, and that uprisingkilled a large part of tyrannical government and drove the rest of its armed minions out of the colonies ---- and establised a free and independent nation, wherein the perfectly-natural and universally-valid individual human rights of life, liberty, private property, and pursuit of personal happiness were to become the sovereign order of society. Yes, these ideals were not shared with Indians and Africans, and that was an evil shame ---- only a fool or a liar could say otherwise. But hear Samuel Adams, below, and decide how this applies to our rapacious government today, this gang of bloodsucking tax-eaters and predatory humanitarians who have declared war on the privately-employed American taxpayer ------
“Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say 'what should be the reward of such sacrifices?' Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!”
The Las Vegas Review-Journal should tell Uncle Sam to get lost.
Yi Ha ***
Minister of Information
Peoples' Capitalist Republic of Whizbangistan
*** Pronounced "YEEEEEEE HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!"
Feds, you ARE a bunch of "nazi morons"
Don't like my comment? too bad.
Maybe Obama Osama's brown shirts don't realize it, but there still is a constitution with first amendment rights and as long as I am not making a threat I can call them any name in the book.
Don't like my comment? too bad.
Maybe Obama Osama's brown shirts don't realize it, but there still is a constitution with first amendment rights and as long as I am not making a threat I can call them any name in the book.
Everything on the Internet and on my computer can be traced and identified. So no big deal to me. It's just a simple reality. Knowing this keeps me out of trouble. Whether I like it or not is irrelevant.
The government wants to track commentators? That's hilarious. Do they realize some of those folks are probably using proxies and they'll need an FBI warrant to even figure out who they are. If anonymous threats to a jury constitute a federal crime then I want the kid who was making similar threats in a video game online tonight to be taken to court! Give me a break. Grow up big brother!
Someone must be rolling in money to be able to afford to subpoena comments that most probably have no probative value. My state is broke, so I hope CA isn't wasting money on internet hooey!
At least one person made serious threats advocating overthrow of the United States of America. Does the ACLU, LVRJ and the rest of you crack/pot heads defend this kind of treason? Do you want to be in their line of fire when they finally snap? Is this person a foreign terrorist? Why would your paper even question what is the right move here Mr. Mitchell? I'm all for free speech, but there is no defense for being a traitor.
Patriot2012... 'Clearly...the time will come for WAR against this criminal US Government. They have changed the laws for their own good. I call out to all our Military branches to take over our government now! Otherwise...you along with the Police and other criminal depts will be in the line of fire when we march!'
Patriot2012... 'Clearly...the time will come for WAR against this criminal US Government. They have changed the laws for their own good. I call out to all our Military branches to take over our government now! Otherwise...you along with the Police and other criminal depts will be in the line of fire when we march!'
According to LVRJ comment Terms and Conditions... "Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once."
Too bad your automatic filter can weed out swear words but not treasonous comments... could have probably saved your legal dept. a few bucks.
Too bad your automatic filter can weed out swear words but not treasonous comments... could have probably saved your legal dept. a few bucks.
Patriot2012... 'Clearly...the time will come for WAR against this criminal US Government. They have changed the laws for their own good. I call out to all our Military branches to take over our government now! Otherwise...you along with the Police and other criminal depts will be in the line of fire when we march!'
Is this an Incitement to Violence? Does it pass the "Immediacy Test"?
Is this an Incitement to Violence? Does it pass the "Immediacy Test"?
The Gestopo would be proud of these actions.
Tom,
Yer in a bit of a pickle here. On one hand, the right thing to do in keeping with your libertarian philosophy would be to fight it to the end.
On the other hand, you have both a financial and fiduciary responsibility to the paper and its keepers.
A real land mine there: Strictly adhere to a libertarian philosophy and risk financial ruin for the paper; negotiate and appear to be a sellout of your libertarian values.
I think I like Eric S's comments. I do not think - after some cogitation, that you have a duty to protect nincompoops that post trash from the confines of their caves.
It would be different if it were your employees.
Yer in a bit of a pickle here. On one hand, the right thing to do in keeping with your libertarian philosophy would be to fight it to the end.
On the other hand, you have both a financial and fiduciary responsibility to the paper and its keepers.
A real land mine there: Strictly adhere to a libertarian philosophy and risk financial ruin for the paper; negotiate and appear to be a sellout of your libertarian values.
I think I like Eric S's comments. I do not think - after some cogitation, that you have a duty to protect nincompoops that post trash from the confines of their caves.
It would be different if it were your employees.
Great comments, folks.
I especially liked the guy who compared online comments to shouting in the streets. I've used that comparison myself. If you wish to speak and remain anonymous, you'd better find another way than on a computer.
Frankly, I'd like to see a movement of people proudly using their real names.
I especially liked the guy who compared online comments to shouting in the streets. I've used that comparison myself. If you wish to speak and remain anonymous, you'd better find another way than on a computer.
Frankly, I'd like to see a movement of people proudly using their real names.
RSS
Comments (42)
Share your thoughts on this story.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.