2005 Anonymity and Litigation Strategies
?Download as PPT, PDF?
0 likes?9 views
A presentation on anonymity in litigation and discussing internet service providers, plaintiffs, and does. Additionally, I discussed litigation strategies.
2005 Anonymity and Litigation Strategies
- 1. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices Anonymity and Litigation Strategy Presented to: Chicago Bar Association’s Cyberlaw and Data Privacy Committee March 18, 2008 12:15pm
- 2. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices Parties Involved ? Internet Service Providers (ISPs) ? Plaintiffs ? Does
- 3. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices ISP Issues ? Disclosure Policies – www.TheAnonymousEmail.com ? Privacy Policies ? Statutes
- 4. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices ISP Issues (cont’d) ? Compliance Is Tantamount
- 5. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices Plaintiff Issues ? Litigation Strategy ? Standards ? Preparation
- 6. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices Litigation Strategy ? Petition for Pre-Suit Discovery ? Doe Defendant
- 7. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices Litigation Strategy (cont’d) ? Petition for Pre-Suit Discovery – Plaintiff v. ISP – Origination – Disfavored
- 8. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices Litigation Strategy (cont’d) ? Doe Complaint – Plaintiff v. Doe ? …..and possibly ISP – Involves all parties – Favored Approach
- 9. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices Litigation Strategy (cont’d) ? Doe Complaint (cont’d) – Complaint (Make Sure Factually Sound) – Motion for Expedited Discovery – Subpoenas
- 10. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices Standards ? Early Standards – Motion to Dismiss Columbia Insurance Co. v. Seescandy.com 185 F.R.D. 573, 578 (N.D. Cal. 1999)
- 11. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices Standards (cont’d) ? Motion to Dismiss - Seescandy (cont’d) – Identify defendant with sufficient particularity – Show previous efforts to locate the defendant – Demonstrate Could Survive Motion to Dismiss – Justify Request and Identify Those with Information
- 12. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices Standards (Cont’d) ? Dendrite Int’l, Inc. v. John Doe No. 3 342 N.J. Super. 134, 775 A.2d 756, 760-761 (N.J. App. 2001) – Notification – Specify Exact Statements – Prima Facie Cause of Action – Produce Sufficient Evidence to Support Each Element – Balance Strength of Prima Facie Case against Necessity for Disclosure
- 13. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices Standards (cont’d) Doe v. Cahill, 884 A.2d 451 (Del. 2005)
- 14. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices Standards (cont’d) ? Mobilisa, Inc. v. John Doe 1, et al. 170 P.3d 712 (November 27, 2007)
- 15. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices Standards ? Determine the Standard ? Apply to the Claims Best Western v. Doe, 2006 US Dist Lexis 56014, (D. Ariz. July 25, 2006)
- 16. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices Standards (cont’d) ? Determined standard based on nature of conduct giving rise to ability to obtain the anonymous individual’s identity (eg communications containing pur expression for which the authori’s identity was being sought) After Adopting Cahill ? Later examined whether Plaintiffs claims for breach of contract and covenants of good faith fair dealing would survive summary judgment Best Western v. Doe, 2006 US Dist Lexis 77942, (D. Ariz. October 24, 2006)
- 17. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices Preparation ? Prepare for Mobilisa ? Prepare for Motion for Summary Judgment ? Notification
- 18. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices Doe Issues ? Due Diligence ? Responsiveness ? Standards
- 19. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices Doe Issues (cont’d) ? Involve the ISPs
- 20. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices Questions and Answers
- 21. 2008 Copyright Mudd Law Offices Thank You Charles Lee Mudd Jr. Mudd Law Offices 3114 West Irving Park Road Chicago, Illinois 60618 773.588.5410 Telephone 773.588.5440 Facsimile cmudd@muddlawoffices.com www.muddlawoffices.com