Coordinated attack on the anonymity of tenants who rate their apartments

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: "Paul Levy" <plevy () citizen org>
> Date: November 19, 2008 5:13:35 PM EST
> To: <dave () farber net>
> Subject: Coordinated attack on the anonymity of tenants who rate  
> their apartments
>
> Along with the ACLU of Northern California, we have intervened in a  
> case
> pending in federal court in San Francisco to protect the anonymity of
> tenants who have criticized the managers of a pair of apartment
> buildings in the Bay Area.  Although there is already a good case in
> that court on subpoenas to identify anonymous Internet speakers, and
> ordinarily we try not to spend our resources where the precedent is
> already set, we decided that this case was worthwhile for two reasons.
>
>
> First of all, to avoid scrutiny by the federal judge to whom the case
> was assigned, the plaintiffs just issued subpoenas without filing a
> motion for leave to do so (normally required before the defendants  
> have
> been served).  And when I contacted him to discuss the case, the
> plaintiffs' lawyer told me that he ALWAYS does it that way, in  
> thirty to
> forty other cases he said.  So this case seems to involve a real
> scofflaw that needs to be called to task.
>
>
> Paul Alan Levy
> Public Citizen Litigation Group
> 1600 - 20th Street, N.W.
> Washington, D.C. 20009
> (202) 588-1000
> http://www.citizen.org/litigation
>
> > > > Joe Newman 11/19/2008 2:12 PM >>>
> For Immediate Release                                           
> Nov. 19, 2008
>
> Contact: Paul Alan Levy (202) 588-1000
>               Joe Newman (202) 588-7703
>               Rebecca Farmer, ACLU Foundation of Northern California,
> (415) 621-2493, ext. 374
>                                                         
>
> Federal Court Should Reject Attempt to Identify
> California Apartment Critics Who Posted Anonymously on Web Site
>
> Revealing Identities of People Who Complained About Their Apartments
> Could Have Chilling Effect on Internet Free Speech
>
> WASHINGTON, D.C. - An attempt by two landlords to identify two dozen
> people who posted comments anonymously about the apartment buildings
> where they live is nothing more than an effort to intimidate critics  
> and
> should be denied, Public Citizen and the American Civil Liberties  
> Union
> Foundation of Northern California said in a federal court brief filed
> today in California.
>
> Parkmerced Investors Properties and co-plaintiff Stellar Larkspur
> Partners issued subpoenas  for the identities of the people who posted
> comments on www.apartmentratings.com, a message board that invites the
> public to discuss apartment buildings in various locations throughout
> the United States. The companies claim that the anonymous posters made
> false and misleading statements about their rental properties, which  
> are
> in San Francisco and Larkspur, Calif. Complaints ranged from too much
> construction noise at the apartments to an increase in utility fees.
>
> Public Citizen and the ACLU, which are representing one of the
> defendants, filed a brief in U.S. District Court for the Northern
> District of California, arguing that the First Amendment protects
> anonymous speech. The plaintiffs also have not offered any evidence to
> back their claims that the comments were defamatory or posted by a
> competitor.
>
> “People have a constitutional right to speak anonymously, and
> allowing corporations to remove that veil without justification would
> seriously chill the free exchange of ideas and commentary on the
> Internet,” Public Citizen attorney Paul Alan Levy said. “The courts
> have consistently ruled that plaintiffs must first prove that they  
> have
> been damaged before they can seek the identity of people who post
> anonymously on the Web.”
>
> Public Citizen and the ACLU are asking the court to deny the subpoenas
> and reject the companies’ lawsuit against the defendant under the
> state’s anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation)
> statute. The California law was aimed at lawsuits that would prevent
> people from speaking out about issues of public interest.
>
> “The Courts play an important role in safeguarding free speech on the
> Internet by ensuring that the subpoena process is not used  
> improperly to
> reveal the identity of anonymous speakers,” said ACLU-NC staff
> attorney Ann Brick. “No one should lose the right to speak anonymously
> without prior court review.”
>
> To read the motion filed by Public Citizen and the ACLU, go to
> http://www.citizen.org/litigation/forms/cases/CaseDetails.cfm?cID=509.
>
> ###
>
> Public Citizen is a national, nonprofit consumer advocacy organization
> based in Washington, D.C. For more information, please visit
> www.citizen.org.
>
>
> Joe Newman
> Press Officer / Public Citizen
> 1600 20th Street NW
> Washington, DC 20009
> (202) 588-7703
> www.citizen.org
>
> Check out our blog:
> www.citizenvox.org
>
> Follow us on Twitter:
> http://twitter.com/Public_Citizen




-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com