Samizdata - 8:22 am on Jun 1, 2011 (gmt 0)
The issue is not about Twitter
It is not about libel, either.
Twitter will obviously comply with (or appeal) the order of a California court, and they understandably don't want to be dragged into disputes between "customers".
But the suggestion appears to be that Twitter itself did not oppose the application at all. And if Twitter did oppose it, what arguments were used, and why did they fail?
Details remain sketchy, but one might conclude that any application to a California court for personal information about a Twitter user anywhere in the world has a high chance of success as long as some grievance is claimed.
What I am interested in is where the line is drawn.
If an official from Iran, Libya, North Korea, or [insert country of choice] made a similar claim, would there be a similar result? What if someone criticised the king of Thailand in a tweet?
Anonymity is often seen as desirable when used by dissidents in other countries.