UK High Court Allows Injunction To Be Delivered Via Twitter

from the you've-been-tweetserved? dept

Last year, we wrote about how a judge in Australia allowed someone to "serve" documents in a legal dispute via Facebook, after other methods proved unworkable. Now, over in the UK, the High Court has allowed an injunction against a Twitter user to be delivered via Twitter itself. It's the typical story. Someone set up a fake Twitter account, and the real person wants it shut down. Of course, Twitter has a process for handling such things, and you'd think they'd just do that -- but apparently the guy was upset that it was a "potentially lengthy process." Yes, how dare Twitter actually make sure it wasn't violating its own users' rights first. Of course, given that the Twitter user is anonymous, it makes you wonder if he or she will even care (or notice).


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 1st, 2009 @ 7:08pm

    I am confused. I thought that people here were generally against making service providers get in the middle of matters such as this. Rather than get Twitter all wrapped up, an individual is instead serving a document using Twitter as the delivery medium.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Saragon, Oct 1st, 2009 @ 7:31pm

    I believe the point....

    ...is that rather than going through the process that Twitter already has in place for handling impersonation complaints on Twitter (which has a certain amount of verification built in), this guy went to court to do the same thing, spending much more on legal fees in the process.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    max.elliott, Oct 1st, 2009 @ 9:46pm

    Hang on....

    A UK injunction via a US company against an unknown twit somewhere in the world?

    And Blaney thinks this will matter... why exactly? The UK courts cannot force Twitter to do _anything_ and how are they going to punish someone they can't ID?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 2nd, 2009 @ 5:17am

    Can they do that in 140 characters?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    John Doe, Oct 2nd, 2009 @ 6:54am

    Re:

    Yes, they can do it in 4 letters. STOP

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    icon
    Matt (profile), Oct 2nd, 2009 @ 5:00pm

    How did he get an injunction? I like that it is being served via Twitter, and agree with the concept that the court should not be uptight about methods of service, but this is an injunction that should never have been granted.

    He is arguing breach of copyright. In 140 characters? What the hell did he copyright, his name? At most this is a trademark infringement, and you don't need an injunction to cure that (instead, you just keep racking up damages).

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This