Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Think -- Occupy Wall Street movement that turned rather ugly -- that confrontation with New York police is now occupying a court of law over the very issue of who owns allegedly incriminating tweets.
Malcolm Harris was busted in October charged with disorderly conduct for his role in this.
Occupy Wall Street march you see here that ended with about seven -- protesters.
Arrested they stormed the Brooklyn Bridge police say.
They warn them in advance don't do it.
Now prosecutors issued a subpoena to examine three months of -- tweets in the belief.
They may contradict his potential defense the police allowed protesters.
To walk on the road in the middle of the bridge.
Assistant DA -- Langston says this quote the defendant may have used that account.
To make statements -- long the bridge itself that were inconsistent.
With his anticipated trial defense.
Orders filed a motion to quash the subpoena claiming that Harris owns the -- not Twitter.
It's a claim that judges already rejected moreover Twitter is now claiming the Fourth Amendment demands a search warrant not a subpoena.
But judge Matthews here Reno observed this quote while the Fourth Amendment provides protection for our physical homes.
We do not have a physical home on the Internet.
He noted that Twitter was -- to redistribute tweets anyone anytime for any reason it chooses.
So what will happen well Twitter will likely lose because and other court cases a courts -- said a subpoena not a search warrant is sufficient.
And tweets Megan are kind of like bank records an individual has no right to challenge a subpoena issued with third party bank and banks.
Almost never win that one either -- -- thank you.
Filter by section