U.K. High Court serves injunction via Twitter
Social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter are trying to do it all these days – enabling conversation, online gaming, file-sharing, etc. And now they are even being used to serve injunctions. Maybe the days of Internet anonymity and online impersonation are over.
The Internet has created as many problems as it has solved, one of which is online impersonation. To impersonate someone in real life is a tricky task, with disguises, fake I.D. and a well-researched back story all needed to pull it off. To impersonate someone online is a little easier, with a blog or social networking account set up in their name pretty much enough to fool some people into believing you’re the real deal.
Social networks are trying to help curtail the problem. Facebook introduced vanity URLs and tried to ensure everyone got the username they wanted/deserved. While Twitter has started verifying high-profile Twitter users such as celebrities, journalists, and companies. But there is an alternate route.
Rather than go through the lengthy process of contacting Twitter, U.K. Solicitors Griffin Law decided to seek an injunction against an anonymous blogger alleged to be impersonating blogger Donal Blaney, the owner of the company. The alleged impersonator writes on twitter.com/blaneysblarney, which is the name of Blaney’s real blog.
The British High Court decided the injunction could be served via Twitter as that was the simplest and most-effective way of reaching the anonymous impersonator. The injunction was served today, delivered straight to the alleged offender’s Twitter page, and includes a link to the text of the full court order.
Dr Konstantinos Komaitis of Strathclyde University’s law faculty told Reuters:
I think this is a landmark decision to issue a writ via Twitter. You are creating a precedent that people will be able to refer to. It only takes one litigant to open the path for others to follow. The law tends to be quite cumbersome and slow, so to have a court deliberate on something like Twitter – so hot, so relevant – it shows quite impressive engagement.
There is however one big problem that hasn’t yet been addressed – what if the alleged offender chooses to ignore the tweeted injunction? As they are anonymous, the only way to then proceed would be the already-discounted method of contacting Twitter and asking the micro-blogging network to interject. So the injunction would have proved absolutely pointless. Except for driving traffic to Blaney’s blog and gaining publicity for his company.
Related Posts:
