Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Facebook Moderator Gets Subpoena in Wikileaks Case

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the moves-of-desperation dept.

netbuzz writes "Lawyers for the Swiss bank that got the plug pulled on Wikileaks.org have dragged a Stanford grad student/human rights activist into the case because he moderated a discussion group about Wikileaks on Facebook. He has no relation to Wikileaks or the case, other than that he helped authenticate documents — completely unrelated to the bank matter — that were posted on Wikileaks. The guy and his lawyer have done a nice job of making lemonade out of this lemon, though."

7 of 83 comments (clear)

  1. Shotgun lawsuit? by KublaiKhan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seems these days that, especially in these high profile cases, the lawyers are suing everybody even connected with the alleged transgressor, whether or not (as is certainly the case here) they have liability of any sort.

    Actually, this goes a bit beyond a 'shotgun' lawsuit--this is more a handgrenade lawsuit, or a roadside bomb lawsuit.

    Is there perhaps some practical means to force someone filing suit to show that the person they're filing suit against is even vaguely the correct one?

    --
    In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
    A stately pleasure dome decree
    1. Re:Shotgun lawsuit? by jaeson · · Score: 5, Funny

      Close only counts with... approximation algorithms?

  2. Noam Chomsky by Shambly · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Apparently Noam Chomsky was also a moderator on that facebook group. It would be really interesting if he was pulled into this. Really the problem seems to be the injunction on the entire site instead of the specific documents.

  3. It's not karma whoring when you're anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's an update on the case. Arguments were heard all morning from both sides; the case is currently in recess.

  4. That is indeed like goldy, but made of iron. by discogravy · · Score: 5, Interesting
    If the meat of the article is so small, why not just post the moneyshot while you're at it?

    Mathews and his attorney, Joshua Kolten, have decided to make lemonade out of lemons: Since the bank insists Mathews has standing in the case, Mathews is asking the judge to consider the harm that the court's earlier injunction against Wikileaks has done to him; namely that it has prevented readers from accessing on Wikileaks the material he has written about subjects completely unrelated to the bank and its business.

    Whoever this kid's lawyer is, he's got a wicked sense of humor.

    --
    FreeBSD for the impatient.
  5. Served complaint, not subpoena by DustyShadow · · Score: 5, Informative

    I thought the same thing as you at first. If you read this it looks like he was served the complaint and added as a defendant. Subpoenas are usually served to someone to produce documents or to show up in court. This looks to me though like they added him as a defendant.

  6. Re:Good for him! by efalk · · Score: 5, Informative

    No you don't. Being sued is very very expensive, and the chances of collecting costs from the plaintif are effectively nil. The legal system loves lawsuits because it makes money for lawyers.

    I recently spent about a year's salary defending myself against a nuisance suit by a spammer. My co-defendant is still on the hook to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.