Readit News logoReadit News
djoldman · 5 days ago
But what is the recourse if IAPs in the 9th district ignore the decision and continue to divulge subscriber information?

I assume subscribers must sue the IAP.

brookst · 5 days ago
I think the ruling is that they are not required to, but it does not say they are forbidden to.

Assuming their TOS says they reserve the right to share such information in response to subpoenas / their whims, I'm not sure there would be much recourse unless there's some law forbidding this.

MrDarcy · 5 days ago
Contact your state attorney general is also an option.
otterley · 4 days ago
And demand what, exactly? And under what law?
idiotsecant · 5 days ago
I don't think there is any law in the US that ISPs can't give away or sell your data if they want to.
bobmcnamara · 5 days ago
Several states have privacy laws limiting or requiring disclosure of how their data is used.

If I understand correctly the FTC only prevents companies from selling your data when they've told you they won't.

sumtechguy · 5 days ago
Would have to read thru Tittle II of the communications act and see what portions they are under. Title I is POTs and Title II is ISPs and Cellphone providers. Title I tends to be much more strict.
brians · 5 days ago
Electronic communications privacy act, to start.
busterarm · 5 days ago
This is why the IAP I worked at 15 years ago took every unmasking subpoena and routed them to the trash. I was so proud of that.
immibis · 5 days ago
You can't just ignore a subpoena if you value not being in jail. You have to argue that you don't have to answer it.
busterarm · 5 days ago
None of them were ever followed up with. So while you're correct in theory, in practice the consequences of it were nonexistent.

Likely because the firm knows that the subpoena that they're sending you is bullshit in the first place. They don't actually want the legal challenge.

getcrunk · 4 days ago
Well thank god corporations can’t be jailed /s