bakedjake - 9:52 pm on May 31, 2011 (gmt 0)
And since when did the US start enforcing laws on US companies, for stuff that's completely UK based?
Twitter is a US company subject to US law. I'm assuming that the infringing data that was posted got posted and was hosted on a US based server.
The foreign entity brought suit in a US court because that where is Twitter is based. I haven't read the suit, but I assume the council sued twitter because of content posted on their site. Alternatively, they might have had a disclosure order from the UK and asked the US court to compel Twitter to disclose the information. The article is very unclear on this subject, but there are treaties and laws that govern how countries reciprocate court decisions.
There's nothing nefarious about this. Because Twitter is a US company a US court would have jurisdiction over a case where Twitter was a party.
Note that I'm not defending the libel laws, I'm simply stating that a US court would need to follow the law (including reciprocation of foreign court decisions where US companies are concerned) when making its judgement. The same thing happens in Canada every single day.
What especially stinks about this case, is that the individuals involved have apparently used large sums of taxpayer's money to take legal action.
Yes, I would find that offensive as well, but most municipalities indemnify their officials if they're acting in good faith.