Corney
JoinedPosts by Corney
-
-
-
-
110
Jehovah’s Witness who posted criticisms on Reddit can remain anonymous, judge rules
by Tameria2001 inhttps://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/jehovah-s-witness-who-posted-criticisms-on-13855357.php.
i had this article pop up about the darksilver case.
it says a federal magistrate in san francisco has now ruled that darksilver can remain anonymous but then it says except for identification to lawyers for the religion’s watchtower publication.
-
-
Corney
EFF's statement:
A fight over unmasking an anonymous Reddit commenter has turned into a significant win for online speech and fair use. A federal court has affirmed the right to share copyrighted material for criticism and commentary, and shot down arguments that Internet users from outside the United States can’t ever rely on First Amendment protections for anonymous speech.
<…>
But we disagree with the court’s final decision: to order limited disclosure so that Watch Tower might attempt to shore up its copyright claim. While the court agreed that “Watch Tower has not demonstrated any actual harm or likelihood of future harm”—the fourth fair use factor—it gave undue credence Watch Tower’s claim that “the harm it suffered from people infringing on its copyrights was directing others away from its website.” Based on the theory that “[p]erhaps Watch Tower, if provided the opportunity, could demonstrate that fewer people visited its website after Darkspilver’s posting,” the court decided to allow Watch Tower’s counsel access to Darkpsilver’s identifying information.
Based on the court’s approach, the Doe standard offers weak protections for fair users. Even a far-fetched theory regarding a particular fair use factor, like the one posited here, might be enough to justify disclosure even if the rest of the fair use analysis clearly suggests the use was lawful. That said, the disclosure is subject to strict limits. Reddit may disclose it only to Watch Tower’s counsel of record, and that counsel is prohibited from sharing that information with anyone else—including the client—without a separate court order. In addition, the court explicitly “admonished that any violation of this Order will be sanctioned.”
This case touches on a lot of EFF’s most important issues, and it’s a prime example of how intellectual property, free speech, and privacy can intersect in complicated ways, making it hard for people to speak out about controversial issues. We are considering next steps. But in the meantime, we are also celebrating a crucial win for the First Amendment and access to anonymous speech for Internet users everywhere.
Full statement: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/05/reddit-commenters-fight-anonynmity-win-free-speech-and-fair-use
-
62
Reaction to GDPR / field service letter
by sir82 inhere is a thread on the new letter to be read to all congregations in all branches on adjustments in door to door work due to the gdpr:.
https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/6274619758608384/2019-boe-elders-letter-may-13-england-ireland-data-protection.
i have...connections....to a foreign language congregation in europe.
-
-
Corney
I know there are at least two another threads on this issue on jwtalk but they are members-only. Is anybody registered there and can access them?
-
110
Jehovah’s Witness who posted criticisms on Reddit can remain anonymous, judge rules
by Tameria2001 inhttps://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/jehovah-s-witness-who-posted-criticisms-on-13855357.php.
i had this article pop up about the darksilver case.
it says a federal magistrate in san francisco has now ruled that darksilver can remain anonymous but then it says except for identification to lawyers for the religion’s watchtower publication.
-
-
Corney
Sea Breeze She at least needs to read some testimonies from those like us who have been shunned for thought crimes.
Did you read the order?
Darkspilver states that, in his experience, people who voice their disagreement or doubts “face rejection [by] and disapproval” from other members of the Jehovah’s Witness community, including leadership and ordinary members. (Id.) Those who openly disagree with the organization’s teachings publicly may be labelled “apostates” and be “excommunicated” or “disfellowshipped” from the community. (Id.) Other Jehovah’s Witnesses, including friends and family members, cut off ordinary social interactions with people who have been disfellowshipped. (Id.) Darkspilver has personal knowledge of people who, after voicing certain opinions, have been shunned by Jehovah’s Witnesses, including people with whom they had close relationships. (Id.) (p. 2)
Watch Tower further argues that Watch Tower is not Darkspilver’s local church and has no ability to excommunicate him from his local congregation. (Polidoro Decl., ¶ 10.) Nevertheless, Darkspilver has expressed substantial concerns over having his identity revealed to anyone in the Jehovah’s Witness community. The Court finds that Darkspilver has demonstrated significant harms if his identity were revealed publicly or even if it were revealed to Jehovah’s Witnesses in his congregation. (p. 12-13)The judge is informed about shunning. And IMO it's not a great idea to influence her through out-of-court testimonies from strangers. If you think your testimonies can be helpful, contact Darkspilver's attorney.
-
110
Jehovah’s Witness who posted criticisms on Reddit can remain anonymous, judge rules
by Tameria2001 inhttps://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/jehovah-s-witness-who-posted-criticisms-on-13855357.php.
i had this article pop up about the darksilver case.
it says a federal magistrate in san francisco has now ruled that darksilver can remain anonymous but then it says except for identification to lawyers for the religion’s watchtower publication.
-
-
Corney
The order: https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.336935/gov.uscourts.cand.336935.18.0.pdf
In balancing the harms, while considering the fair use defense, the Court finds that they tip sharply in Darkspilver’s favor. However, the Court notes that Darkspilver’s concerns stem largely out of his fear that those in his congregation will discover his identity and shun him. If Reddit reveals Darkspilver’s identity to Watch Tower’s counsel, under an “attorney’s eyes only” restriction, then any harm to Darkspilver would be alleviated. This restriction would enable Watch Tower to pursue its copyright claim without causing harm to Darkspilver.
Therefore, the Court HEREBY GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Darkspilver’s motion to quash. Reddit shall respond to the subpoena and provide the requested information to Watch Tower’s counsel. However, only attorneys of record in this matter may obtain information about Darkspilver’s identity. Watch Tower’s attorneys of record shall not to disclose Darkspilver’s identity to anyone else without approval in a Court Order from this Court. For example, Watch Tower’s attorneys of record may not disclose Darkspilver’s identity even to its client, staff, or expert witnesses without approval in a Court Order from this Court.*3
If Watch Tower elects to file a lawsuit against Darkspilver, the Court directs Watch Tower to seek to file the suit under his pseudonym and to keep his actual identity under seal, for attorney’s eyes only. Moreover, Watch Tower is admonished that any violation of this Order will be sanctioned and that this Court retains jurisdiction over any potential violation of this Order.
*3 Watch Tower claimed at the hearing that it plans to disclose Darkspilver’s identity to its forensic experts so that Watch Tower can determine how Darkspilver obtained confidential information in the chart and prevent further disclosure of that confidential information. This purpose is not related at all to a copyright issue, and for that reason, the Court rejects that form of disclosure.
-
62
2019 BOE Elders letter May 13 England - Ireland Data Protection
by Not_Culty inhttps://tinyurl.com/y2bzncu9.
-
-
Corney
Correction: the Zimbabwean letter (mentioned in the post above) was really sent by mistake. Therefore, the new policy applies only to European countries.
-
62
2019 BOE Elders letter May 13 England - Ireland Data Protection
by Not_Culty inhttps://tinyurl.com/y2bzncu9.
-
-
Corney
St George of England, I just googled it and... at least, today I learned something new.
Anders Andersen, in my opinion, it's too broad. I also believe door-to-door note keeping isn't a serious privacy issue, in contrast to Bethel databases. Finally, I'm skeptical about GDPR in general.
I don't oppose the judgment and its consequences - frankly, I'm glad to see the recent changes - but I also don't consider this as a victory or something similar.
-
62
2019 BOE Elders letter May 13 England - Ireland Data Protection
by Not_Culty inhttps://tinyurl.com/y2bzncu9.
-
-
Corney
sir82, you can read about this case and background in CJEU judgment and (non-binding) opinion of its Advocate General. In aftermath of this judgment, the Finnish Supreme Administrative Court uphold decision of the Finnish Data Protection Board "prohibiting the Jehovah’s Witnesses Community from collecting or processing personal data in the course of door-to-door preaching carried out by its members unless the legal requirements for processing such data laid down".
Some interesting legal blogs about the CJEU judgment:
https://leidenlawblog.nl/articles/knock-knock.-whos-there-the-data-protection-directive-95-46
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=77ddd905-24e9-445f-be42-7d014c38f549
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/07/is-data-protection-coming-home-cjeu-on.html
https://verfassungsblog.de/die-zeugen-jehovas-und-das-datenschutzrecht/ (in German)
It's worth noting (despite I have strong personal reservations about the judgment) that the proceeding before Finnish data protection authorities was initiated by a local ex-JW activist. Read more here: https://johanneksenpoika.fi/tietosuoja3/index.html (in Finnish)
-
62
2019 BOE Elders letter May 13 England - Ireland Data Protection
by Not_Culty inhttps://tinyurl.com/y2bzncu9.
-
-
Corney
keinlezard Same letter in France
And also in Finland, Baltic states, Poland and Spain. And in all EU and EEA states as well.
Interestingly, French letter was sent to congregations in metropolitan France and French overseas departments, whereas France branch territory also includes two sovereign non-European nations, Mauritius and Seychelles.
I'm curious whether this letter could be sent to Zimbabwean congs by mistake
-
62
2019 BOE Elders letter May 13 England - Ireland Data Protection
by Not_Culty inhttps://tinyurl.com/y2bzncu9.
-
-
Corney
It looks like the same letter was sent to congregations in Zimbabwe. Is it a new worldwide policy?
https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/comments/bok4ty/leak_watchtower_zimbabwe_change_gdpr_eu_rules_for/