4 edits | Rule applies to CRIMINAL cases only New Jersey Supreme Court has become the first State court in the nation to require that ISPs must be presented with a subpoena before releasing private user data. Please note that this requirement is for CRIMINAL indictments and not civil lawsuits. Civil lawsuits, like those filed by the RIAA, do not follow the same rules and have the same protections. This NJ ruling won't stop ISPs from turning over your info to the RIAA with a "John Doe" subpoena.
Also note this comment by the court decision:
»www.judiciary.state.nj.us/opinio···Reid.pdf
Court also declines to adopt a requirement that notice be provided to account holders
whose information is subpoenaed. Unscrupulous individuals aware of subpoenas could delete or damage files on
their home computers and thereby effectively shield them from legitimate investigations.
We express no view today on the appropriate standard for disclosure of ISP subscriber information in civil cases,
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
| said by fAcEtIOUs:[...]that this requirement is for CRIMINAL indictments and not civil lawsuits. Where exactly are you getting that infomation from. The NJ Constitution is applicable across the board, whether civil or criminal charges are applicable. |
|
1 edit | said by SilverSurfer1:said by fAcEtIOUs:[...]that this requirement is for CRIMINAL indictments and not civil lawsuits. Where exactly are you getting that infomation from. The NJ Constitution is applicable across the board, whether civil or criminal charges are applicable. I got it from the NJ Supreme Courts decision in this case.
»www.judiciary.state.nj.us/opinio···Reid.pdf
We express no view today on the appropriate standard for disclosure of ISP subscriber information in civil cases, --
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
1 edit | that's nice. I read the same opinion, but I want to know specifically where it states that the opinion is applicable only to criminal charges? |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:We express no view today on the appropriate standard for disclosure of ISP subscriber information in civil cases,
Whether civil or criminal charges, the fact remains that the State Constitution section that applies to privacy is applicable no matter what. The fact that there wasn't a view expressed by the judiciary in the above referenced case and statement does not make it black & white that their opinion applies only criminally.
The very same argument that Ms. Reid's counsel made in her criminal case can also be applied civilly, as well. So to say that the opinion is applicable only to criminal and not civil charges is not only disingenuous, it's just plain wrong. |
|
| said by SilverSurfer1:The very same argument that Ms. Reid's counsel made in her criminal case can also be applied civilly, as well. So to say that the opinion is applicable only to criminal and not civil charges is not only disingenuous, it's just plain wrong. That is YOUR opinion, FWIW. 
The judges had the opportunity to apply their decision to all cases(criminal & civil), they neglected to do so despite the ACLU asking they do that in an amicus brief. My take is that they left the EXISTING civil rules as is.
So argue your case with the NJSC. They spoke and they don't agree with you.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
