Judge Not Allowed To Hide Google's Report About Shutting Down Gmail Account Per Judge's Order
from the public-scrutiny dept
Thankfully, an appeals court has now said otherwise:
We were concerned that the suit was filed improperly, that without even considering the obvious flaws in the lawsuit the judge had jumped the gun in issuing a restraining order without giving either Google or the anonymous user a chance to respond, that Google had gone along with the TRO far too easily any notice, and that by denying of access to the compliance report Judge Ware was sweeping all these past mistakes under the rug. Consequently, representing MediaPost Communications, which broke this story in the first place, we appealed this ruling, while agreeing that to the extent that the compliance report disclosed the anonymous userís identity, that information should be redacted.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has now held that the right of public access cannot be so easily evaded. Having been demanded by the judge so that he, and Rocky Mountain, could be sure that the TRO had been obeyed, "the report in question is a quintessential judicial document," the court said. The public's right cannot be evaded by labeling the submission process as "lodging" instead of "filing." The court therefore reversed and remanded with instructions to release the document with redaction only for any truly private and confidential information.