by Mike Masnick
Thu, Aug 4th 2011 7:07pm
In June, we wrote about a troubling ruling from a magistrate judge, ordering an ISP, Skybeam, to identify an anonymous Wikipedia editor, who wrote stuff that the company Faconable objected to. While Skybeam was fighting this order, Faconable was able to work out a "settlement" with the anonymous John Doe and filed a notice of voluntary dismissal. In response, Skybeam still wanted the original order to identify users vacated, noting that even if it didn't have to do so, just having that ruling out there could represent a competitive disadvantage for the firm. Thankfully, the court did vacate the order, noting that "through no fault of its own, Skybeam has been denied review of the Magistrate Judge’s Order. Because Skybeam had nothing to do with causing its objections to become moot, it “ought not in fairness be forced to acquiesce” in the Magistrate Judge’s Order." This is good, because without that, such an order would have remained on the books...
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Popehat v. James Woods SLAPP-down Match; Coming Soon To A Court Near You
- Daily Dot Latest To 'Keep Conversation Moving Forward' By Not Letting Site Visitors Comment At All
- Everyone's A Bad Guy: German Regulator Orders Facebook To Drop Its Stupid 'Real Name' Policy
- I'll Put My Name On This Piece Declaring It Idiotic To Argue Against Anonymity Online
- UN Report: Encryption And Anonymity Deserve 'Strong Protection'