PayPal Inc. has won a partial victory in its effort to keep sensitive business records from the "Anonymous" defendants accused of hacking its servers. But a judge rejected the company’s bid to keep the material under a strict protective order, saying that was a civil-side move.
Attorneys for the group charged in the 2010 cyberattack on eBay Inc.’s PayPal subsidiary were hoping to subpoena a wide swath of information from the payments company relating to the attack. PayPal’s lawyers at Cooley were attempting to quash the entire request. If it was forced to comply, it was seeking to keep the materials designated as "for attorneys eyes only." In blocking the protective order, U.S. Magistrate Judge Paul Grewal suggested in his Thursday ruling that in a civil case the company may have had its way, but the burden of proof is higher in a criminal case.
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
