PogoWasRight.org

Menu
  • About
  • Privacy
Menu

Not a great way to wake up (UPDATED)

Posted on June 9, 2018June 25, 2025 by Dissent

UPDATE – June 10. I heard from Michael Gottlieb of Boies Schiller Flexner. They are withdrawing the subpoena and replacing it with a more narrow one. Obviously, I am very glad to hear that, and thank Michael for contacting me to let me know that it was never their intention to have me or other non-parties caught up in this. 

Original post:

I woke up this morning, showered, and fired up the laptop while I waited for the coffee to perc. My first clue that something was up was seeing that I had 28 notifications waiting for me on Twitter.  That seemed high for overnight. I soon found the explanation:  a tweet by @abtnatural:

This apparently genuine subpoena by @bsfllp demands Twitter produce “documents sufficient to identify the owner of” @popehat, @PogoWasRight, and every other account that ever tagged @wikileaks in a tweet between 1/1/15 and 6/1/18.https://t.co/cp7UhPmhFxhttps://t.co/m7VZEtBZRh pic.twitter.com/mCBZ3hKCDC

— Virgil (@abtnatural) June 9, 2018

This apparently genuine subpoena by @bsfllp demands Twitter produce “documents sufficient to identify the owner of” @popehat, @PogoWasRight, and every other account that ever tagged @wikileaks in a tweet between 1/1/15 and 6/1/18. https://t.co/cp7UhPmhFxhttps://t.co/m7VZEtBZRh pic.twitter.com/mCBZ3hKCDC

WTH???

For those who do not recognize some of those Twitter handles, back in October, 2017, @abtnatural (Virgil), @Popehat (former federal prosecutor Ken White) and I had all been informed by Twitter Legal that  they had received legal process compelling them to produce our information. A grand jury in Texas had subpoenaed our details. Why had they subpoenaed mine, you wonder?  It turns out that they subpoenaed my information simply because someone  had tagged me in a tweet in a conversation that I was never in. The tweet was a smilie – nothing more than that, but because the tweeter was being prosecuted criminally and he tweeted to me, the grand jury wanted my details. Needless to say, I was not understanding of the grand jury’s demand for my details.

Eventually the subpoena for my details was withdrawn, although I remained fully prepared to fight it in court, if need be. Now my details were being subpoenaed again, it seems.

Image credit: Dreamstime

This time, it is a civil case, Rich vs. Butowsky, and no court had signed off on this subpoena.

Note that the subpoena, embedded below, does not name my Twitter account specifically in Paragraph 3, but my account would fall under “Secondary Accounts” as defined in Paragraph 4, where a secondary account is any account that communicated with any of the 20 named primary accounts. (Update: to be clearer, it seems that in March, 2017, I posed a question to Wikileaks on Twitter seeking clarification as to how they redacted files, which apparently makes me a “secondary account” under the language of the subpoena.)

To make matters even more offensive and absurd, the overly broad subpoena includes not just details as to who owns an account, but asks for the contents of the account, including tweets and private (direct) messages, and also metadata.

If Michael Gottlieb of Boies Schiller Flexner, attorneys for the plaintiff, wanted to provide a useful demonstration of over-the-top disregard for free speech and privacy, he just did it.

This subpoena deserves to be smacked down and lawyers who engage in such conduct should face the wrath of a privacy-conscious public.

I do not expect Twitter to ever provide my details to Mr. Gottlieb or his law firm in this matter.  I have not even contacted my lawyers about this because it is so absurd.

Michael Gottlieb and I follow each other on Twitter. If we run into each other at a privacy law conference or privacy + security forum, I’d like to have a few words with him.

But no, this was not a good way to wake up this morning.

Loading...

 

No related posts.

Category: CourtFeatured NewsOnlineU.S.

Post navigation

← Unproven facial-recognition companies target schools, promising an end to shootings
California Weed Dispensaries Can Legally Sell Customer Information to Data Brokers →

Now more than ever

Search

Contact Me

Email: info@pogowasright.org

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Categories

Recent Posts

  • Germany’s top court holds that police can only use spyware to investigate serious crimes
  • Flightradar24 receives reprimand for violating aircraft data privacy rights
  • Nebraska Attorney General Sues GM and OnStar Over Alleged Privacy Violations
  • Federal Court Allows Privacy Related Claims to Proceed in a Proposed Class Action Lawsuit Against Motorola
  • Italian Garante Adopts Statement on Health Data and AI
  • Trump administration is launching a new private health tracking system with Big Tech’s help
  • Attorney General James Takes Action to Protect Sensitive Personal Information of Tens of Millions of People

RSS Recent Posts on DataBreaches.net

  • Connex Credit Union notifies 172,000 members of hacking incident
  • Federal judiciary says it is boosting security after cyberattack; researcher finds new leaks (CORRECTED)
  • Bank of America Refused To Reimburse Georgia Customer After Hackers Hit Account. Then a News Station Showed Up.
  • NCERT Issues Advisory on “Blue Locker” Ransomware Targeting Pakistan’s Key Institutions
  • Scattered Spider has a new Telegram channel to list its attacks
©2025 PogoWasRight.org. All rights reserved.
Menu
  • About
  • Privacy