Reddit Will Not Have to Hand Over Identity of Former Jehovah's Witness
A federal judge in San Francisco ruled a Redditor's posts citing Watch Tower's copyrighted works were fair use but that online free speech "is a developing area where the standards are far from settled."
March 02, 2020 at 11:49 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
Reddit will not have to turn over the identity of a user to the organizational body of the Jehovah's Witness faith after a judge ruled Monday in a copyright dispute with major potential implications for online free speech.
In a 16-page order, U.S. District Judge James Donato of the Northern District of California found that a Reddit contributor's posts critiquing the church and its administrative body, Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania were a noninfringing fair use of the group's copyrighted works.
Rejecting a magistrate judge's prior recommendation, Donato granted a motion to quash a subpoena from Watch Tower seeking identifying information of a Redditor known as Darkspilver. The subpoena, issued to Reddit last January, sought Darkspilver's subscriber information, name, telephone number, address, email and IP addresses, under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Reddit declined to respond to the subpoena, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation intervened on behalf of the anonymous user.
"The only authorized purpose for the subpoena under the DMCA was to discover his identity as an alleged copyright infringer to protect Watch Tower's copyrights," Donato said. "If Darkspilver establishes that he made fair use of the copyrighted works, no claim of copyright infringement could plausibly be alleged against him, and the subpoena would not be authorized under the DMCA."
Last May, U.S. Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim of the Northern District of California ruled that Reddit must reveal the identity of the user, but only to attorneys involved in the case. Donato said Kim's approach of applying the First Amendment to anonymous online speech was problematic. "It is a developing area where the standards are far from settled," he wrote.
Donato also said that Kim's invocation of the two-part test for anonymous speech the Northern District of California developed in 2005 in Highfields Capital Management v. Doe did not involve the key elements of copyright or the DMCA. "Highfields, the source of the test, involved claims sounding in trademark and unfair competition, but not copyright law or fair use," he said.
When it came to the fair use arguments, the judge said that Watch Tower failed to challenge any of the evidence.
"Instead, it offers the general challenge that the inquiry is 'woefully premature' because fair use is an affirmative defense that can't be considered unless and until a complaint is on file," according to the opinion. "This is a surprising proposition given that Watch Tower was required to evaluate fair use before sending its take-down notice to Reddit, and that Watch Tower and its attorney represented they had done that. They are not well situated to say now that the inquiry should wait."
Reddit and Alex Moss of the Electronic Frontier Foundation did not respond to a request for comment Monday evening.
Watch Tower's counsel, Paul D. Polidoro, an in-house lawyer for Watch Tower in Warwick, New York, and Anthony Smith of the Law Office of Anthony V. Smith in San Mateo, California, also did not respond to a message requesting comment late Monday.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTexas Court Invalidates SEC’s Dealer Rule, Siding with Crypto Advocates
3 minute readSamsung Flooded With Galaxy Product Patent Lawsuits in Texas Federal Court
GC Conference Takeaways: Picking AI Vendors 'a Bit of a Crap Shoot,' Beware of Internal Investigation 'Scope Creep'
8 minute readOpenAI, NYTimes Counsel Quarrel Over Erased OpenAI Training Data
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250