Bits Blog: Twitter Appeals to Protect Protester’s Tweets

The little blue bird is standing its ground on this one.

Twitter said on Thursday that it was appealing a decision by a federal judge in New York that required it to turn over a Twitter user’s posts in connection with the Occupy Wall Street protests last year. The case stands to shape how the law interprets what a social media post is and whether the user has a right to privacy over it.

The case concerns a Brooklyn man, Malcolm Harris, who was arrested on a charge of disorderly conduct during a demonstration on the Brooklyn Bridge last October. The Manhattan District Attorney’s office sought Mr. Harris’ Twitter posts from two days before the day of the protest through the end of the year. Both he and Twitter refused to turn them over.

The judge, Matthew Sciarrino Jr., ruled in early July that Mr. Harris did not have “a reasonable expectation of privacy” under the Constitution and that posting on Twitter was akin to screaming out a window. It was not only a setback for Twitter. It also affirmed the ability of law enforcement authorities to rifle through social media posts for evidence.

The judge had earlier ruled that the defendant had no standing to quash the subpoena himself because he had given Twitter the right to spread his messages across the world.

Twitter has been especially assertive in challenging the government’s quest for those communications. Its company policy is to inform Twitter users when their communications are sought by law enforcement and to allow them to challenge this in court. It did this last year in the case of three WikiLeaks volunteers who were being investigated by the Obama administration.

Earlier this month, Twitter also announced that it would report the number of times government authorities sought information about its users, in a Google-style transparency report. It said that government agencies in the United States had sought information on 948 Twitter user accounts in the first half of this year, more than any other country in the world.

In the Harris case, the company appears to be pushing the courts to deliberate over what constitutional protections apply to social media posts and whether defendants should be able to challenge subpoenas filed by the authorities.

“At Twitter, we are committed to fighting for our users,” the company said in a statement. “Accordingly, we are appealing this decision which, in our view, doesn’t strike the right balance between the rights of our users and the interests of law enforcement.”

Bits Blog: Twitter Appeals to Protect Protester’s Tweets

The little blue bird is standing its ground on this one.

Twitter said on Thursday that it was appealing a decision by a federal judge in New York that required it to turn over a Twitter user’s posts in connection with the Occupy Wall Street protests last year. The case stands to shape how the law interprets what a social media post is and whether the user has a right to privacy over it.

The case concerns a Brooklyn man, Malcolm Harris, who was arrested on a charge of disorderly conduct during a demonstration on the Brooklyn Bridge last October. The Manhattan District Attorney’s office sought Mr. Harris’ Twitter posts from two days before the day of the protest through the end of the year. Both he and Twitter refused to turn them over.

The judge, Matthew Sciarrino Jr., ruled in early July that Mr. Harris did not have “a reasonable expectation of privacy” under the Constitution and that posting on Twitter was akin to screaming out a window. It was not only a setback for Twitter. It also affirmed the ability of law enforcement authorities to rifle through social media posts for evidence.

The judge had earlier ruled that the defendant had no standing to quash the subpoena himself because he had given Twitter the right to spread his messages across the world.

Twitter has been especially assertive in challenging the government’s quest for those communications. Its company policy is to inform Twitter users when their communications are sought by law enforcement and to allow them to challenge this in court. It did this last year in the case of three WikiLeaks volunteers who were being investigated by the Obama administration.

Earlier this month, Twitter also announced that it would report the number of times government authorities sought information about its users, in a Google-style transparency report. It said that government agencies in the United States had sought information on 948 Twitter user accounts in the first half of this year, more than any other country in the world.

In the Harris case, the company appears to be pushing the courts to deliberate over what constitutional protections apply to social media posts and whether defendants should be able to challenge subpoenas filed by the authorities.

“At Twitter, we are committed to fighting for our users,” the company said in a statement. “Accordingly, we are appealing this decision which, in our view, doesn’t strike the right balance between the rights of our users and the interests of law enforcement.”

City Room: Judge Orders Twitter to Release Protester's Messages

Thoughts may be ephemeral, but a tweet, apparently, is forever.

A Criminal Court judge in Manhattan ruled on Monday that Twitter must turn over to prosecutors messages sent by a Brooklyn writer during the Occupy Wall Street protests last fall. In doing so, the judge, Matthew A. Sciarrino Jr., indicated that although private speech was protected, the same did not apply to public comments on Twitter.

“The Constitution gives you the right to post, but as numerous people have learned, there are still consequences for your public posts,” Judge Sciarrino wrote. “What you give to the public belongs to the public. What you keep to yourself belongs only to you.”

The writer, Malcolm Harris, was one of about 700 protesters arrested in October while walking on the roadway of the Brooklyn Bridge. He was charged with disorderly conduct, a violation. In January, the Manhattan district attorney’s office subpoenaed all messages that he had posted to Twitter from two days before the Occupy Wall Street protests began in September through the end of 2011.

Mr. Harris’s messages, which are no longer publicly available, are of interest to prosecutors because they may contradict an argument they expect him to make at trial: that the police led or escorted protesters off the pedestrian paths and into the bridge’s roadway.

His lawyer, Martin R. Stolar, filed a motion to quash the subpoena, saying it had not been delivered properly, was overly broad and was issued for an improper purpose.

Judge Sciarrino dismissed the motion in April, writing that Mr. Harris lacked the standing to oppose the subpoena because under Twitter’s policies, he had granted the company the “worldwide, nonexclusive, royalty-free” right to distribute his messages, which were all publicly available.

Twitter itself then sought to quash the subpoena. But in the decision released on Monday, Judge Sciarrino ordered it to turn over Mr. Harris’s messages. While noting that laws regarding social media were evolving, he held that public speech, regardless of the forum, did not enjoy the same protections as private speech.

The case over a minor criminal charge raises significant issues in the still-new area of social media.

As is becoming more common, prosecutors requested Mr. Harris’s postings and member information directly from Twitter, which then notified Mr. Harris. The American Civil Liberties Union filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case, arguing that prosecutors should be required to obtain a search warrant from a judge for each request and that the person whose posts were being sought should have an opportunity to oppose the demand in court.

For law enforcement, social-media postings that document a person’s immediate thoughts and precise location provide a potent tool.

“We are pleased that the court has ruled for a second time that the tweets at issue must be turned over,” said Daniel R. Alonso, the chief assistant district attorney in Manhattan. “We look forward to Twitter’s complying and to moving forward with the trial.”

Twitter had argued that demands for postings and account information placed it under an undue burden of either turning over the information or fighting each request on behalf of its users.

In a statement, the company said it was “disappointed” with the ruling and was considering its options.

“Twitter’s terms of service have long made it absolutely clear that its users own their content,” the statement said. “We continue to have a steadfast commitment to our users and their rights.”