Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Investment Chat Board Lawsuits -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (2379)	1/18/2002 12:09:33 PM
From: SalemsHex	Respond to of 12465

I agree. Let's hope they remain on SI's Hot Subject list. In the mean time, it'd be nice to see this thread appear on the Hot Subject list as well. Fair Is Fair! Subject 52062

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (2379)	1/18/2002 12:15:38 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 12465

Haven't they said they've suspended action on the subpoena pending the motions to quash? Matt over on IH said he would just crumple up such a subpoena and do a Michael Jordan into the nearest trash can with it. But he doesn't realize, perhaps, that failure to comply with a subpoena can subject you to legal liability. It's not just the lawyer ordering the information; at least in state court, technically the Court is ordering it, and the lawyer is acting as an agend of the Court. So either SI itself or the members need to move to quash. The interesting thing will be, if some but not all of the 41 move to quash, if the Court does quash will it quash the whole subpoena, or just those portions relating to the members challenging it? The whole field of subpoenas of message board poster inforamtion is, I think, still in significant legal limbo, and will be for some time.