Re: 6/1/00 - [CUM] Summins Engine Co. - Benefit critics targeted by subpoena
Benefit critics targeted by subpoena
By John Clark
Most of the anonymous Yahoo! messages subpoenaed by Cummins Engine Co. were critical of the company’s new domestic partners benefit policy that extended insurance coverage to gays and unmarried couples.
Yahoo! has until 10:30 a.m. today to turn over the identities of eight anonymous posters who wrote 21 messages on the company’s financial message board in April and May.
Anonymous users with screen names such as “carlos350_1999,” desk_pounder_2000” and “justducky2000” were subpoenaed by Cummins two weeks ago, as part of a California lawsuit against up to 100 John Does.
Cummins’ California attorney, David Schindler, said the company would not release a copy of the subpoena, or the pseudonyms of the users whose identities it was seeking to reveal.
“That is not a public document,” Schindler said. “That is only for Yahoo!”
However, one of the subpoenaed users sent The Republic a copy of the subpoena, which identified the messages and the anonymous users sought by Cummins.
According to the subpoena, Cummins wants the names, telephone numbers, addresses, e-mail addresses and the Internet service providers of the eight anonymous users.
The company also ordered Yahoo! to confirm the times the messages were posted to the board and to verify which time zone the message times reflected.
Yahoo! allows users to obtain an anonymous account name and to post message for public view on message boards. Other users can then comment on those posts.
Of the 21 messages cited in the subpoena, 12 discussed or were responses to the domestic partners benefits decision, and five discussed other companies hiring or attempting to hire Cummins workers. The remaining four were either critical of Cummins management, discussed tactics for avoiding a takeover attempt, or mentioned a “Dakota” program.
The most critical message, by a user identified as “nsider_47201,” attacked Cummins management, claiming the company does not like to hear from subordinates who notice problems.
“As a stockholder, I want Cummins to terminate the middle management employees who hide the truth from the technical (vice presidents),” the user wrote. “Imagine how much money Cummins could make if they did not have so many warrantee recalls on the engines and parts.”
Two weeks ago, Schindler said the company filed the lawsuit to protect trade secrets, Cummins’ relations with its employees or to find people who would harm the company. A company spokeswoman declined to comment on what parts of the messages crossed the line for the company.
“It is our practice not to comment on ongoing litigation,” Amy Small Bilyeu, Cummins public relations manager, said. “As far as commenting on the specific messages identified in the subpoena, we would not comment on those either.”
Yahoo! spokespeople could not confirm whether the Internet company planed to turn over the user identification, whether the information had already been turned over, or the status of the subpoena.
However, recent changes at Yahoo! allow the company to notify its users that a subpoena has been issued against them.
“Typically we provide users who are subpoenaed as part of John Doe lawsuits with notice of a subpoena,” said Jon Sobel, Yahoo!’s associate general counsel.
“That is our practice. Following such notice, typically, we comply with our obligations under subpoenas.”
The company changed its notification policy after some users complained that they did not know of an impending lawsuit against them.
“It seems that our users appreciate that we are going to this extra step,” Sobel said. “It is not something we are required to do by law.”
Yahoo! decides what information to release under a subpoena on a case-by-case basis, Sobel said. Typically such subpoenas are very broad.
“It truly is a difficult balance,” Sobel said. “For the past several years, many companies and individuals who feel they have been slandered have been very concerned that they have not been able to stem speech they feel is illegal. Yahoo! has to balance its obligations as a witness against its interests in informing and protecting its users. It is a very difficult line.”
However, Yahoo! notifies its users frequently as they post messages that they are not truly anonymous online.
“You should never assume you are anonymous on the Web,” Sobel said.
“We tell our users that on our message board and in our terms of service. It is a mistake to think you are completely anonymous. We have tried to educate our users to understand that.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Portions ©2000, The Republic, Columbus, Indiana
©1998-2000 1up! Software, All Rights Reserved.
therepublic.com
=====
mcwrosch74: subpoena
by: desk_pounder_2000 6/22/00 9:30 pm
Msg: 2565 of 2867
Yes, I have a copy. However, the subpoena simply demands from Yahoo the production of records (the electronic tracing of listed messages including the two of yours Nos. 2125 & 2196). It does not state the alleged wrongdoing.
(The "complaint" is filed with the court stating some wrongdoing and from that filing the subpoena is later issued.
In the June 1 article in The Republic.com written by John Clark (jclark@therepublic.com, he quotes Cummins attorney (David Schindler) as stating that the complaint (lawsuit) was filed to "protect trade secrets, Cummins relations with its employees or to find people who would harm the company." (anyone they choose, in short!)
A copy of the complaint may be obtained by calling various legal support services in the local area where the lawsuit is filed. In this case, I was referred to: Innercity Express at (408) 288 4680. They provide services to attorneys, gathering data from the various courts, etc. They will need from you the CASE NAME and Number off the Subpoena. On the Yahoo notice to you (and me), Yahoo cites the "action" as "Cummins Engine Company, Inc. v. John Does 1 through 100, Case No. CV789553, pending in the Superior Court of the State of California, for the County of Santa Clara. The subpoena dated May 11, 2000." I verified this info against the subpoena in my possession. This appears to be all you need.
I did not go to the expense of obtaining a copy of the Complaint but suspect that you could get a copy for a $100 -$200 bucks or so. They, the service, may prefer to deal with your attorney but if you are respectable and persistent, then you will probably get it.
I will mail a copy of the subpoena to you at a PO Box or any other address you post here. I will fax it to any law office (if you have an attorney) It's about 28 pages long.
John Clark at theRepublic.com (noted above) has a copy (subpoena) and might be willing to send it to you; maybe want to do an interview or get your thoughts/reactions in exchange. He appears to be quite reliable/genuine.
Since I am not a Cummins employee but just a investor in their sorry ass company, I doubt they will pursue me.
Otherwise, I would have challenged the subpoena (no one did, by the way)
Let me know....and good luck.
messages.yahoo.com |
