Chilling Effects
Home Weather Reports Report Receiving a Cease and Desist Notice Search the Database Topics
Sending
Topic HomeFAQsMonitoring the legal climate for Internet activity
Stanford Center for Internet & Society
 Chilling Effects Clearinghouse > John Doe Anonymity > Notices > Re: re-code.com (NoticeID 624) Printer-friendly version

April 2, 2003

 

Sender Information:
Venable, Baetjer, Howard, & Civiletti, LLP
Sent by: [Private]
Venable, Baetjer, Howard, & Civiletti, LLP
Washington, D.C., 20005-391, USA

Recipient Information:
[Private]
[Private]
Scottsdale, AZ, 85260, USA


Sent via: FedEx
Re: Re: re-code.com

Dear Sir:

This firm is counsel to Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Wal-Mart has learned of a website found at www.re-code.com. Re-code.com is registered anonymously through your service. This site encourages the public to participate in a modern-day version of the old scam in which a customer takes a price sticker from a cheap item and puts it on a more expensive item before handing it to the checkout person. Re-code.com provides a forum for consumers to shares and print out barcode information for inexpensive items at stores such as Wal-Mart, and them take them to Wal-Mart and place tem on top of the legitimate bar code for more expensive items. Wal-Mart barcodes are specifically made available on the website.

As such, re-code.com is encouraging and facilitating theft and fraud against Wal Mart. This is clearly in violation of your own policy as well as illegal. As such, Wal-Mart demands that you immediately shut down this website and that you provide us with contact information for the real registrant of re-code.com pursuant to Paragraph 4 of your customer agreement. We would also like to see a list of other domain names this person has registered with you so that we can confirm whether they also violate Wal Mart?s rights.

Wal-Mart insists that this website be shut down within 48 hours of receipt of this letter, and that you contact me within five days of receipt of this letter to provide contact information for the registrant of re-code.com. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation in this matter.

Very truly yours,

 
FAQ: Questions and Answers

[back to notice text]


Question: Why is anonymous speech important?

Answer: There are a wide variety of reasons why people choose to speak anonymously. Many use anonymity to make criticisms that are difficult to state openly - to their boss, for example, or the principal of their children's school. The Internet has become a place where persons who might otherwise be stigmatized or embarrassed can gather and share information and support - victims of violence, cancer patients, AIDS sufferers, child abuse and spousal abuse survivors, for example. They use newsgroups, Web sites, chat rooms, message boards, and other services to share sensitive and personal information anonymously without fear of embarassment or harm. Some police departments run phone services that allow anonymous reporting of crimes; it is only a matter of time before such services are available on the Internet. Anonymity also allows "whistleblowers" reporting on government or company abuses to bring important safety issues to light without fear of stigma or retaliation. And human rights workers and citizens of repressive regimes around the world who want to share information or just tell their stories frequently depend on staying anonymous – sometimes for their very lives.


[back to notice text]


Question: Isn't my ISP required by law to tell me if someone asks for my Internet-usage records and identity?

Answer: Unfortunately, in practice CyberSLAPP subpenas are rarely challenged becaue ISPs often fail to notify the individual who's personal information is sought. Even when they do, the short deadline (often as little as 7 days) does not provide enough time for the speaker to find and hire an attorney and the attorney to prepare the Constitutional arguments necessary to defend against the subpena.


[back to notice text]


Question: I signed a confidentiality/privacy agreement with my ISP that provides that they will not release my information. Doesn?t that protect me?

Answer: No. Most privacy agreements state that information will be turned over in response to legal requests, and a subpena is such a request. Even if the agreement does not say so, a legally issued subpoena overrides such agreements as a matter of public policy. Each ISP has a different policy about notifying users when their information has been subpoenaed, but they cannot simply ignore a subpoena under the law without risking legal santion themselves.


[back to notice text]


Question: What other resources are available?

Answer: Web sites dealing with this issue include:

www.aclu.org,
www.citizen.org,
www.eff.org,
www.epic.org,
www.johndoes.org,
www.casp.net,
www.cybersecuritieslaw.com,
cyber.findlaw.com/expression/censorship.html


[back to notice text]


Question: What should I do if I receive notice that my ISP has received a subpoena for my data?

Answer: First you should decide whether you wish to fight to protect your identity, Internet usage records, or whatever else is being sought. You might want to ask your ISP for a copy of the subpoena if they haven't already provided one. If you decide to fight it, you should inform the ISP immediately, and you may want to request that they delay compliance to give you time to find a lawyer. Then find a lawyer, who will file a motion to have the subpoena thrown out. (If your lawyer can later prove that the lawsuit was frivolous, you may be able to recover legal fees if your state has passed an anti-SLAPP statute.)


[back to notice text]


Question: Can my ISP or the host of a message board be held liable for defamatory statements I make on the grounds that they are a "publisher" or "republisher" of the information?

Answer: No. Federal law provides: "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider." This has been interpreted to protect hosts of discussions between other people against defamation and libel claims as a "republisher" of the information. Note that this protection does not extend to claims under intellectual property laws.


Topic maintained by Stanford Center for Internet & Society

Topic Frequently Asked Questions (and Answers)
Chilling Effects Clearinghouse - www.chillingeffects.org
disclaimer / privacy / about us & contacts