<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>LibertyVoice &#187; anonymity</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.libertyvoice.net/tag/anonymity/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.libertyvoice.net</link>
	<description>Freedom and internet</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 00:49:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Ron Paul not allowed to find out who posted mean video about Jon Huntsman on YouTube</title>
		<link>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2012-01/ron-paul-not-allowed-to-find-out-who-posted-mean-video-about-jon-huntsman-on-youtube/</link>
		<comments>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2012-01/ron-paul-not-allowed-to-find-out-who-posted-mean-video-about-jon-huntsman-on-youtube/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 18:33:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Evan Brown (@internetcases)</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CyberLaw]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anonymity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[twitter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[youtube]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.internetcases.com/?p=2757</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee, Inc. v. Does, 12-00240 (N.D. Cal. January 25, 2012) (Hat tip to Venkat for posting a link to this decision.) Ron Paul&#8217;s campaign &#8212; Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee, Inc. &#8212; sued some John Doe defendants in federal court over an offensive video attacking former (but then current) [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2012-01/ron-paul-not-allowed-to-find-out-who-posted-mean-video-about-jon-huntsman-on-youtube/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No deposition of account holder allowed until he is named as defendant in BitTorrent copyright case</title>
		<link>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2012-01/no-deposition-of-account-holder-allowed-until-he-is-named-as-defendant-in-bittorrent-copyright-case/</link>
		<comments>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2012-01/no-deposition-of-account-holder-allowed-until-he-is-named-as-defendant-in-bittorrent-copyright-case/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 03:44:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Evan Brown (@internetcases)</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CyberLaw]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anonymity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bittorrent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ediscovery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Electronic Discovery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Evidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[infringement]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.internetcases.com/?p=2638</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hard Drive Productions, Inc. v. Doe, 2012 WL 90412 (E.D. Cal. July 11, 2012) In a mass copyright infringement suit, plaintiff served a subpoena on an internet service provider and got the identifying information for the account holder suspected of trading a copy of a movie via BitTorrent. The account holder was uncooperative with plaintiff’s [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2012-01/no-deposition-of-account-holder-allowed-until-he-is-named-as-defendant-in-bittorrent-copyright-case/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Live Tweeting from the ‘Restaurant of Broken Dreams’</title>
		<link>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-11/live-tweeting-from-the-%e2%80%98restaurant-of-broken-dreams%e2%80%99/</link>
		<comments>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-11/live-tweeting-from-the-%e2%80%98restaurant-of-broken-dreams%e2%80%99/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 19:08:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Justin Silverman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CyberLaw]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Free speech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anonymity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Blogs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Massachusetts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Photo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Text]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[twitter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Video]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.libertyvoice.net/?guid=07927f77bcec280e3d92ba75438a680c</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
When web developer Andy Boyle overheard a couple discussing their marital woes in a Burger King in Boston on Nov. 7, he immediately recognized the entertainment value and began tweeting a play-by-play. 


“I’m listening to a marriage disintegrate ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-11/live-tweeting-from-the-%e2%80%98restaurant-of-broken-dreams%e2%80%99/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Video: my appearance on the news talking about isanyoneup.com</title>
		<link>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-11/video-my-appearance-on-the-news-talking-about-isanyoneup-com/</link>
		<comments>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-11/video-my-appearance-on-the-news-talking-about-isanyoneup-com/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Nov 2011 16:05:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Evan Brown (@internetcases)</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CyberLaw]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anonymity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Computer Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[harassment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[infringement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[isanyoneup.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Section 230]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social media]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.internetcases.com/?p=2602</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last night I appeared in a piece that aired on the 9 o&#8217;clock news here in Chicago, talking about the legal issues surrounding isanyoneup.com. (That site is definitely NSFW and I&#8217;m not linking to it because it doesn&#8217;t deserve the page rank help.) The site presents some interesting legal questions, like whether and to what [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-11/video-my-appearance-on-the-news-talking-about-isanyoneup-com/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Which VPN Providers Really Take Anonymity Seriously?</title>
		<link>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-10/which-vpn-providers-really-take-anonymity-seriously/</link>
		<comments>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-10/which-vpn-providers-really-take-anonymity-seriously/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2011 14:01:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>enigmax</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anonymity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[P2P and Filesharing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vpn]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://torrentfreak.com/?p=40670</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last month it became apparent that not all VPN providers live up to their marketing after an alleged member of Lulzsec was tracked down after using a supposedly anonymous service from HideMyAss. We wanted to know which VPN providers take privacy extremely seriously so we asked many of the leading providers two very straightforward questions. Their responses will be of interest to anyone concerned with anonymity issues.<p>Source: <a href="http://torrentfreak.com/which-vpn-providers-really-take-anonymity-seriously-111007/">Which VPN Providers Really Take Anonymity Seriously?</a></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-10/which-vpn-providers-really-take-anonymity-seriously/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ISP Gets Identity-Seeking Subpoena Vacated</title>
		<link>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-08/isp-gets-identity-seeking-subpoena-vacated/</link>
		<comments>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-08/isp-gets-identity-seeking-subpoena-vacated/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2011 13:50:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Sharkey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CyberLaw]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Free speech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anonymity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Colorado]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defamation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legal Threat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Subpoenas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Text]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.libertyvoice.net/?guid=c317879d5a85ecf68c9cffe2226219e0</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[

From the credit-where-credit's-due department (with the requisite hat-tip to David Ardia's Twitter account):


I've written previously about clothing company Façonnable's lawsuit against an anonymous Wikipedia editor. To sum up: The company sued a p...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-08/isp-gets-identity-seeking-subpoena-vacated/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>At the Intersection of Anti-SLAPP and Anonymity</title>
		<link>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-07/at-the-intersection-of-anti-slapp-and-anonymity/</link>
		<comments>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-07/at-the-intersection-of-anti-slapp-and-anonymity/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Jul 2011 18:08:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Sharkey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CyberLaw]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Free speech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anonymity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Colorado]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legal Threat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SLAPP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Texas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false"></guid>
		<description><![CDATA[

Consider two cases: In Colorado, clothing company Façonnable is
attempting to sue an anonymous Wikipedia editor (or, possibly, more
than one; the number is sort of up in the air) over some unflattering
edits to the company's Wikipedia page. But firs...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-07/at-the-intersection-of-anti-slapp-and-anonymity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Façonnable USA Corp. v. John Does 1-10</title>
		<link>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-06/faconnable-usa-corp-v-john-does-1-10/</link>
		<comments>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-06/faconnable-usa-corp-v-john-does-1-10/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Jun 2011 21:28:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>CMLP Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CyberLaw]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Free speech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anonymity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Colorado]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defamation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legal Threat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Subpoenas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Text]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false"></guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
     
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-06/faconnable-usa-corp-v-john-does-1-10/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Court deals blow to anonymous Bittorrent defendants’ efforts to challenge subpoenas</title>
		<link>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-06/court-deals-blow-to-anonymous-bittorrent-defendants%e2%80%99-efforts-to-challenge-subpoenas/</link>
		<comments>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-06/court-deals-blow-to-anonymous-bittorrent-defendants%e2%80%99-efforts-to-challenge-subpoenas/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Jun 2011 14:50:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Evan Brown (@internetcases)</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CyberLaw]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anonymity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anonymous]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bittorrent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dunlap Grubb & Weaver]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Electronic Discovery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[motion to quash]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[quash]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[subpoena]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Copyright Group]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.internetcases.com/?p=2421</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[West Coast Productions v. Does 1 &#8211; 5,829, &#8212; F.Supp.2d &#8212;, 2011 WL 2292239 (D.D.C. June 10, 2011) The judge in one of the well-known mass copyright cases filed by Dunlap, Grubb &#038; Weaver a/k/a U.S. Copyright Group (West Coast Productions v. Does 1 &#8211; 5,829) has issued an order denying motions to quash filed [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-06/court-deals-blow-to-anonymous-bittorrent-defendants%e2%80%99-efforts-to-challenge-subpoenas/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>District judge stays magistrate’s order requiring identification of anonymous defendants</title>
		<link>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-06/district-judge-stays-magistrate%e2%80%99s-order-requiring-identification-of-anonymous-defendants/</link>
		<comments>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-06/district-judge-stays-magistrate%e2%80%99s-order-requiring-identification-of-anonymous-defendants/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Jun 2011 02:55:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Rogers (@jonarogers)</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CyberLaw]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Free speech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anonymity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[First Amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[subpoena]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.internetcases.com/?p=2389</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is a post by Jonathan Rogers. Jon is a licensed attorney in California, with a focus on technology and entertainment law. You can reach him by email at jon@jonarogers.com or follow him on Twitter at @jonarogers. Faconnable USA Corp. v. Doe, Slip Copy, 2011 WL 2173736 (D.Colo., Jun 2, 2011) Faconnable issued a subpoena duces tecum [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.libertyvoice.net/2011-06/district-judge-stays-magistrate%e2%80%99s-order-requiring-identification-of-anonymous-defendants/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

