Published: May 20th 2011 - at 10:52 pmCould the #superinjunction lead to Twitter being banned in the UK?
This evening’s news that a professional sportsman who may or may not be the person known as ‘CTB’ has filed legal proceedings against Twitter and ‘persons unknown’ appears to have prompted a degree of bemusement.
And nowhere more so than over at Heresy Corner, where the Heresiarch has rather uncharacteristically succeeded in massively over-analysing the situation…
So how can Twitter satisfy the demands of the English courts – assuming, that is, that CTB’s case is found to have merit? The obvious way would be to block Twitter in the UK, putting it permanently out of the reach of British judges. It could happen. Already some US-based news and gossip sites, including National Enquirer, are unviewable in Britain without use of a proxy server, so alarmed are the publishers by English libel law. If CTB’s case succeeds, or inspires others, Twitter’s bosses might begin to see such a course of action as preferable to fighting costly legal battles on foreign soil.
I don’t think I could live without Twitter. I’m frightened.
I’m not, but then I’m an old school nethead who’s seen this kind of thing several times before.
The clue to what’s actually going on here is in the statement from CTB lawyers – who just happen our to be our old ‘friend’ Schillings – as cited by the BBC:
Lawyers at Schillings who represent CTB have issued a statement clarifying the action it has taken.
It said it was not suing Twitter but had made an application “to obtain limited information concerning the unlawful use of Twitter by a small number of individuals who may have breached a court order”.
From that we can reasonably infer both that Schillings are seeking to obtain registration information and server logs relating to a small number of specific Twitter accounts involved in the publication of CTB’s real name in breach of a High Court injunction.
They seem to be operating under the belief that at least one of these accounts will be traceable back to an individual who is some way connected to one of the main parties involved in the ongoing case to which the injunction relates.
It also seems eminently reasonable to think that CTB and Schillings suspect that the injunction was deliberately breached by this as yet unidentified person(s) – specifically so the injunction could eventually be lifted on the grounds that the information was already in the public domain and had been broadcast so widely that the injunction no longer served any useful purpose.
Whether this has any prospect of success seems largely a question of whether the courts, either here or – eventually – in the US, view this as nothing more than a speculative fishing expedition.
Or they might take the view that ‘CTB’ and Schillings have reasonable grounds to suspect that a deliberate attempt has been made to negate the injunction by an individual or organisation with a vested, and possibly pecuniary, interest in the case to which the injunction relates.
What this will not mean, however, is the end of Twitter in the UK or large numbers of Twitter users receiving a summons to answer a charge of contempt of court simply for having retweeted a bit of salacious gossip.
---------------------------
| Tweet |
'Unity' is a regular contributor to Liberal Conspiracy. He also blogs at Ministry of Truth.
· Other posts by Unity
Story Filed Under: Blog ,Civil liberties ,Media
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Reader comments
Sorry – this article is so badly written. Sentence structure is ridiculous. A shame you’ve rushed this, because you probably have some good points to make. But at the moment this is virtually illegible.
I wonder if anyone can think of another occasion when the legal profession has taken on a booming new technology and won?
Illegal downloads? Well in the end it has been music companies that have been forced to join ‘em as they couldn’t beat ‘em. The earlier technology of taping music won out over any attempt to ban it too.
Anything else?
The law is ultimately about consent. We all tacitly agree to abide by laws that the government passes. If we don’t agree, we don’t obey them and juries do not convict people for breaking them and the law dies. There is no chance that Twitter is going to lose this. Perhaps some martyrs will be created, but I just don’t see a trend being started here. The legal profession is going to have to deal with reality and the reality is that technology makes things like bans on naming people impossible to enforce.
[1] “at the moment this is virtually illegible” – do you mean unintelligible?
I thought it was fairly straightforward – lawyers are not after twitter per se, but details of those who used twitter to circumvent a legal injunction – or am I missing something?
Well, I said “it could happen”, not that it would, nor that it was likely. As more details have emerged of the action (I wrote before Schillings put out their statement) it has become clear that the initial headlines about “suing Twitter” created a false impression. As concerns this particular action.
Where this will all end, though, no-one knows. The author of the Tweets in question – which were not the first naming of the individuals in question – may not be found, or may be found not to be connected with media organisations. CTB is not the only person named on Twitter. It may well prove impossible to prevent or punish this type of revelation by seeking disclosure orders. In which case… well, what?
Legally, the status of Twitter – as publisher or just as a conduit for information – is unclear. What it will do about this and possible future legal actions, I haven’t a clue. Nor do you. But if disclosure orders don’t work, claimants may well be tempted to go after Twitter itself, here or in California. Obviously, there’s a large British market to think about, but if the company does face repeated legal harassment by British law firms, blocking the site in the UK might begin to seem (my original words) like an attractive option. So, yes, it could happen, if not yet.
An even more worrying possibility was floated by Shane Richmond of the Telegraph, who notes that the DEA gives ministers power to shut down or block websites containing illegal material. Given the amount of embargoed information being traded, it could be argued that Twitter is such a site. Even I think that’s a bit far-fetched.
With respect to Schillings issuing letters on behalf of ARK Academies, they certainly tried to protect a chilling story indeed.
Ark (Absolute Return for Kids) acts as a funding agent for what is being implemented in schools (and not just academy schools) across the UK. This includes Future Leaders, and the Teens and Toddlers Sustainability Replication Programme.
More on this here, including links to Schilling’s solicitors letters in the comments section, at this location:
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2010/06/454599.html
The ‘Opening Minds’ curriculum, now being implemented in the UK and Europe, and possibly through GEMS (Global Education Management Systems) in Dubai, who have now bought some of the UK Academy schools in particular 3es, whose parent company was Aecom, military and subcontracting to the pentagon);
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2011/05/480181.html
Reactions: Twitter, blogs
- Liberal Conspiracy
Could the #superinjunction lead to Twitter being banned in the UK? http://bit.ly/j1OVBe
- Mat Beal
No. RT @libcon Could the #superinjunction lead to Twitter being banned in the UK? http://bit.ly/j1OVBe
- Double.Karma
RT @libcon: Could the #superinjunction lead to Twitter being banned in the UK? http://bit.ly/j1OVBe
- anthony rigby
RT “@libcon: Could the #superinjunction lead to Twitter being banned in the UK? http://t.co/u2M4hDr”
- Gael
RT @libcon: Could the #superinjunction lead to Twitter being banned in the UK? http://bit.ly/j1OVBe
- sunny hundal
Could the #superinjunction lead to Twitter being banned in the UK? http://bit.ly/j1OVBe asks @unity_MOT
- Nemesis Republic
RT @sunny_hundal: Could the #superinjunction lead to Twitter being banned in the UK? http://bit.ly/j1OVBe asks @unity_MOT
- Phillippa Treharne
RT @sunny_hundal: Could the #superinjunction lead to Twitter being banned in the UK? http://bit.ly/j1OVBe asks @unity_MOT
- r@v
Possibly RT @sunny_hundal: Could the #superinjunction lead to Twitter being banned in the UK? http://bit.ly/j1OVBe asks @unity_MOT
- Ian
RT @sunny_hundal: Could the #superinjunction lead to Twitter being banned in the UK? http://bit.ly/j1OVBe asks @unity_MOT <multi bn$ biz? No
- Donal
Possibly RT @sunny_hundal: Could the #superinjunction lead to Twitter being banned in the UK? http://bit.ly/j1OVBe asks @unity_MOT
- Rosie Seed
“@sunny_hundal:Could the #superinjunction lead 2Twitter being banned in the UK? http://t.co/uEaKJyG asks @unity_MOT” @johnrentoul #QTWTAIN?
- Gods & Monsters
RT @sunny_hundal: Could the #superinjunction lead to Twitter being banned in the UK? http://bit.ly/j1OVBe asks @unity_MOT
- KateMcCandlish
“@libcon: Could the #superinjunction lead to Twitter being banned in the UK? http://t.co/vokHe4b” EXCELLENT update!
- Sunder Katwala
#QTWTAIN @johnrentoul > RT @libcon Could the #superinjunction lead to Twitter being banned in the UK? http://bit.ly/j1OVBe
- John H
RT @nextleft: #QTWTAIN @johnrentoul > RT @libcon Could the #superinjunction lead to Twitter being banned in the UK? http://bit.ly/j1OVBe
- Siobhan Freeman
http://t.co/AxknA5n /via @Geeklawyer RT re: superinjunctions and twitter!
- Reese Gordon
http://bit.ly/jmh9rN Unity – Liberal Conspiracy
- Scarlett Gyimah
Could the #superinjunction lead to Twitter being banned in the UK? | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/3NDNSLT via @libcon
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
You can read articles through the front page, via Twitter or RSS feed. You can also get them by email and through our Facebook group.
» Do older people really need more NHS healthcare?
» There are alternatives to the reckless ‘Plan A’
» On Beecroft: it is already quite easy to sack people
» Why Cameron’s claim of 600,000 jobs created is plainly wrong
» By using age to allocate NHS funding, Lansley rewards Tory voters
» The rise in domestic violence deaths is not an “isolated” problem
» Adrian Beecroft highlights mindset of Tory right
» The US is now a model for the Eurozone to save itself
» The IMF plan to revive the economy doesn’t go far enough
» The Boris brand is weaker than his friends think
» Nine things you can do to halt Lansley’s destruction of our NHS
|
48 Comments 93 Comments 23 Comments 54 Comments 10 Comments 26 Comments 23 Comments 69 Comments 44 Comments 25 Comments |
 |
LATEST COMMENTS » Chaise Guevara posted on Red Tory Blond: gay marriage "homophobic" » Just Visiting posted on On Beecroft: it is already quite easy to sack people » john b posted on Red Tory Blond: gay marriage "homophobic" » Cylux posted on Red Tory Blond: gay marriage "homophobic" » Shinsei1967 posted on Criticism of Obama for its own sake: a reply to Mehdi Hasan » Chaise Guevara posted on Adrian Beecroft highlights mindset of Tory right » Mary Tracy posted on How Newsnight demonised a single mother » Chaise Guevara posted on Red Tory Blond: gay marriage "homophobic" » Chaise Guevara posted on Do older people really need more NHS healthcare? » Chaise Guevara posted on Do older people really need more NHS healthcare? » Chaise Guevara posted on '43% of young women sexually harassed' » Chaise Guevara posted on '43% of young women sexually harassed' » Trooper Thompson posted on Criticism of Obama for its own sake: a reply to Mehdi Hasan » Robin Hood: backed by the rich, backed by the rest, says new poll | ToUChstone blog: A public policy blog from the TUC posted on Poll: banks not paying fair share for crisis » Colin Hall posted on Adrian Beecroft highlights mindset of Tory right |
