Date: January 25th, 2008 6:38 PM Author: Citrine Stag Film
yeah, it's not perfect anonymity if you're being actively surveilled by the cops or something, but for trying to track someone down after the fact it's pretty much absolute
Date: January 25th, 2008 6:07 PM Author: Sadistic vivacious base indirect expression
HighBeam: IP addresses of all users who accessed the article about Doe's (alleged) dad (http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-915261.html ) between 12:00 am and 5:23 pm on March 7, 2007.
Date: January 26th, 2008 12:15 AM Author: contagious theater
The people you work with aren't smart enough to understand that they have to show that they tried to get the ip addresses?
Are your colleagues unfamiliar with the concept of due diligence?
Your office is full of stupid shits who don't know anything about the law. Maybe someday if you ever go to law school you'll see what it's like working in a law office.
Date: January 26th, 2008 1:50 AM Author: contagious theater
No, it allows them to get the judge to grant their motion for expedited discovery. Then they get to ask GTO and Rach for THEIR "nonexistent" (ahem) records.
Dig?
If you stick around long enough maybe something will rub off on you.
Date: January 26th, 2008 2:45 AM Author: contagious theater
I guess you didn't read any of the filings, nor did you read what I just posted.
Some of the places they contacted DO have information that they will hand over to the Ps.
GTO and Rach DO have information that they are going to hand over to the Ps.
GTO announced right here that he has info, that the info will out one or more Ds, and that the Ds should get counsel. he said that he would not fight a subpoena and that he would comply with it.
Both he and Rach have been talking to the Ps.
The Ps approached AHWIAB and asked for cooperation. He blew them off and now he's named. What he did is minor - they probably would have let him totally off the hook in exchange for some info. But sadly, he just blew them off and has now been outed.
yeah, doing nothing is definitely the smart thing to do.
Date: January 26th, 2008 3:01 AM Author: contagious theater
No. He blew them off after he knew they knew who he was.
AHWIAB did not know what they wanted from him.
It was obvious to AHWIAB that they knew who he was and that they could serve him if they wanted to.
AHWIAB had nothing to lose by accepting their offer to talk. From what I can see, the things he said were minor compared to the others. It would not surprise me in the least if they were prepared to let him off the hook in exchange for ratting out the other Ds (or at least giving as much info as he could.)
Do whatever you want. The end result will be the same. by prolonging it you actually make yourself suffer more - makes no difference to me.
Date: January 26th, 2008 3:27 AM Author: contagious theater
Let me break it down for you like this.
It's easy to tell you're a D. You're using a CA. You're not only defending the Ds, which is fine, but you're obsessing over it and posting on the subject for hours.
You are also making the same sort of delusional, can't-accept-the-grim-and-ugly-truth "arguments" that other Ds make. These arguments are just absurd. Dismissed on summary judgment? That's just completely insane. Impossible. No one in their right mind would think this case would get dismissed on summary judgment - unless they were simply unable to accept the ugly truth of the consequences of a motion for SJ failing.
NOW - we know you're a D. And soon they are going to have ALLLL the ip logs - including today.
They just look up your IP address, and they can use that to give them a starting point to look for other posts you've made.
Date: January 26th, 2008 3:15 AM Author: French Party Of The First Part
It's hilarious how you, NYBarExamGod, show up at all the right times to quibble with unimportant aspects of posts here, defend the Ps, and call just about every poster a defendant - almost reminiscent of paranoia.
Then signing off every post with a "Better watch out - Rach's gonna get you!" If I didn't know any better, I'd almost think you had a personal interest in the lawsuit...
Date: January 26th, 2008 3:22 AM Author: contagious theater
You assume that anyone who sides with the Ps must be one person, that there can't be *gasp* more than one?
I already said what my personal interest is. Schadenfreude.
I defend the Ps because the stuff the Ds said was way, way over the line. I'm not very happy about a lot of what's going on on the Ps side, but it is impossible to not empathize with them.
Date: January 26th, 2008 3:24 AM Author: French Party Of The First Part
"You assume that anyone who sides with the Ps must be one person, that there can't be *gasp* more than one?"
I'll paypal you $1000 if you are not the same poster as NYBarExamGod. Same posting style, same terrible analysis of the law, same lack of knowledge of the technical issues, etc.
"I already said what my personal interest is. Schadenfreude."
Of course, because you're a dick.
"I defend the Ps because the stuff the Ds said was way, way over the line. I'm not very happy about a lot of what's going on on the Ps side, but it is impossible to not empathize with them."
I can agree with this. Not ALL the stuff the Ds said was 'way, way over the line', but obviously much of what went on during those threads was very objectionable.
Date: January 25th, 2008 11:55 PM Author: gaped fortuitous meteor
It's totally ludicrous however from an IT perspective. Unless the archiving software is malfunctioning, there's no way UNC has that information for more than 3 months at most. And there's no way that person's ISP has that information for more than a few months.
Date: January 25th, 2008 6:32 PM Author: onyx water buffalo area
It seems to me a pretty frightening thing that, whatever the reasons, the legal system can be used to "catalog" information on anyone who viewed/read a court opinion. I know jack shit about the law and law school, but doesn't that set a fairly dangerous precedent?
Date: January 25th, 2008 6:13 PM Author: Sadistic vivacious base indirect expression
ServInt (I guess this is Xoxo's server host): All logs from May 1, 2005 to present for Autoadmit.com, Xoxohth.com, Cohenrisk.com, and c16.statcounter.com.
Date: January 25th, 2008 6:20 PM Author: Sadistic vivacious base indirect expression
Reply from ServInt: We lease our servers, and we have no control over the data. No backups. Can't say whether logs exist, but very unlikely. Logs typically held for less than two weeks.
Date: January 26th, 2008 1:48 AM Author: contagious theater
You're reading way, way too much into it.
You're assuming that the person who wrote this email actually knew specifically what info they had. That's not what she says. She said that she was told that they were preserving everything they were able to associate with the IPs.
You Ds are so desperate you try to find a glimmer of hope in the most hopeless of places.
Date: January 26th, 2008 2:53 AM Author: Histrionic olive sex offender alpha
It's hilarious how the plaintiffs and/or their sympathizers and legal counsel seem to constantly troll XOXO to try and scare the defendants into turning themselves in.
Date: January 26th, 2008 3:03 AM Author: Histrionic olive sex offender alpha
You yourself may not be, but it seems very clear that they are pretty desperate, having resorted to both hacking and social engineering attacks in their quixotic battle to remove anonymity from the internet.
Date: January 26th, 2008 3:18 AM Author: French Party Of The First Part
no fucking joke, the entire board knows who I am. What's your point? Going to continue to cower behind your anonymity, taking cheap shots at me as if I had something to do with the lawsuit?
NEWSFLASH: Many of us posters on here are sympathetic to the Does (even if we think some of their claims are on shaky legal ground), hate pauliewalnuts as much as the Does (or even more so), and generally have no quibble with persuing some of the defendants. Like I said, take your sanctimonious bullshit elsewhere.
Date: January 26th, 2008 3:35 AM Author: contagious theater
LOL Claims on shaky ground? Care to present your arguments against?
Everyone hates PW. Everyone with a brain knows that he'll sell out everyone if he gets the chance. In fact the only reason he probably hasn't sold everyone out already is the fact that he's afraid they'll track his email down.
This is the guy who outed a Sullivan and Cromwell associate for merely emailing him that he liked the T14 site. That guy is pathological.
Date: January 26th, 2008 3:41 AM Author: French Party Of The First Part
"LOL Claims on shaky ground? Care to present your arguments against?"
we've been through this ad nauseum. Regardless, the Ps will get what they really want, which are outted defendants (although I highly doubt they'll get more than a small handful... we'll see in the coming weeks/months)
"Everyone hates PW. Everyone with a brain knows that he'll sell out everyone if he gets the chance. In fact the only reason he probably hasn't sold everyone out already is the fact that he's afraid they'll track his email down. "
I would be very, very, VERY surprised if all the Ds know each other. In fact, I would be surprised if PW could actually give anyone away. I'm sure you have a brilliant theory as to why this is wrong.
Date: January 26th, 2008 3:48 AM Author: contagious theater
No really, I'd like to see your arguments for why the Ps claims are on shaky ground. Did you just read the complaint? Seemed quite compelling to me. Summary judgment? As a matter of fact I DO think the case could be won on summary judgment - by the Ps! I just don't see how the Ds could come up with any defense to the defamation per se claims. Please, I'd love to hear your jurisprudential analysis.
You must know about PWs penchant for outing people yet you claim that he can't out any of the Ds. Now I know you're lying. He is a notorious outing villain. THere are thousands of posts about his outing exploits and the great efforts that were undertaken to clean them up.
I KNOW you know about these things. The fact that you're denying it here proves to me that you are a liar.
Date: January 26th, 2008 1:20 PM Author: French Party Of The First Part
"You must know about PWs penchant for outing people yet you claim that he can't out any of the Ds."
I never said he couldn't out any of the Ds. Why do you insist on hyperbole and strawmen against people who actually agree with you? Stop being an insufferable cunt
"He is a notorious outing villain. THere are thousands of posts about his outing exploits and the great efforts that were undertaken to clean them up."
At least THREE OF THE PEOPLE HE CLAIMED TO OUT WERE NOT WHO HE SAID THEY WERE.
I would appreciate it if you stopped calling those who have honest disagreements with you a liar. People can have differences without lying, and the fact that you impute bad motives to every fucking poster here shows what a delusional moron you are.
Date: January 26th, 2008 12:28 AM Author: gaped fortuitous meteor
Maybe, but why wouldn't rach tell everyone he was going to log IPs from now on? That's by far their most promising lead, that rach logged IPs and people kept using those accounts.
Date: January 25th, 2008 7:13 PM Author: Electric Insane Famous Landscape Painting Liquid Oxygen
There's no doubt in my mind that this guy is an XO poster:
"i even read and enjoyed your screed on beatrice.com. no one reads fiction nowadays because we get all the fiction we can handle from the teletube and the interweb."
Also rails against AA, cites O'Connor in gruter, and talks shit to a bunch of black profs.
Date: January 25th, 2008 6:48 PM Author: maniacal saffron hall
this lawsuit is 179 pages of shit.
These companies only keep logs for 60-90-120 days. Most of the logs they are seeking preservation of did not exist anymore at the time they were seeking the preservation. They will never be able to out more than a handful of D's. These lawyers are clearly not aware of how this stuff works.
Microsofts response is the best, they say they will preserve everything they have but they probably dont have anything because they delete everything every 90 days. The material they want preserved dates to March, but the request dates to December...its all long gone!
Date: January 25th, 2008 11:19 PM Author: Pearl Meetinghouse
No, nobody's been subpoenaed. Good thread overall, but the subpoenas are proposed ones to show the judge. Plaintiffs can't issue a subpoena without the court's permission since discovery hasn't began. That's the whole nature of the motion for expedited discovery.
Date: January 25th, 2008 11:26 PM Author: Pearl Meetinghouse
I'm not sure if the judge can just automatically grant it because there's no opposition. There's got to be law on how judges handle this, but I imagine the judge has an obligation to consider the reasonableness of it.
I don't know the judge and what the legal authority would be for the defendants' position, but the plaintiffs put together a convincing argument for why they're entitled to proceed in this fashion. I don't think the discovery is overbroad and burdensome, either. They're not asking for the moon and the stars; they want very specific things.
Date: January 25th, 2008 11:35 PM Author: Pearl Meetinghouse
I wonder if they can "waive" their right to proceed as Does by not taking reasonable /sufficient measures to protect their identities from being revealed. It's not like they filed anything under seal.
Date: January 25th, 2008 6:52 PM Author: French Party Of The First Part
There's no way to recap the whole story. The complaint itself (linked above) alleges all the material you need to know about why the xoxo posters are getting sued. The whole story is pretty damn long.
Date: January 25th, 2008 6:53 PM Author: maniacal saffron hall
the subpoenas are futile since logs older than 120 days are about as likely to exist as Martians so there is nothing to worry about for the D's. Lawyers are technologically incompetent people.
Date: January 26th, 2008 12:35 AM Author: gaped fortuitous meteor
Actually the truly scary thing is--think about it for a second--if these people are crazy enough to do this shit when only mildly provoked by a national news story, do you really want to ruin their careers?
Date: January 26th, 2008 12:00 PM Author: gaped fortuitous meteor
Come now. The people here aren't really stable to begin with. Do you really think the last 7+ months of pressure bearing down on the defendants hasn't gotten to them? Affected their work or grades?
Imagine all those weeks and months of going into work and spending late nights in the office or law library, knowing that at any time all the work and planning that got the defendant where he or she was would be snuffed out in two subpoenas. Imagine spending every day wondering when and if your career would end, or what GTO had in his files, or what other people you've never even met might be doing to sell you down the river. Eventually, in fear of being found out, it might affect your social and family life, making you withdraw a bit, making you really wonder why it's worth living when it'll likely all be destroyed.
One day, this thought crosses your mind when you're at the grocery store, and you buy three bottles of tylenol. "Migraines," you tell yourself as you walk home. But as soon as you get into your soiled, dingy 1-br apartment, you open them all up and ingest every pill you can, downing it all with cheap bourbon. Then, sprawled out on the bathroom floor, you wait to die wretched and alone. You don't leave a suicide note and don't tell anyone. You're discovered only after several days of not responding to calls, answering e-mails or being seen in public.
Nobody knows why it happened until the day the subpoenas come. Suddenly Keker & Van Nest is litigating against the estate of the Ayatollah or Rock-n-Rollah. Then, in an awesome flash, it all becomes clear.
Date: January 26th, 2008 12:03 PM Author: Citrine Stag Film
or in the alternative, the day the subpoenas come out, our unstable D makes a quick trip to New Haven and attends to some business before downing the 3 bottles of tylenol...that's what I'd do, but I'm not a coward
Date: January 26th, 2008 1:46 AM Author: contagious theater
Sometimes people can make you do stuff and they don't have to ask nicely. This would be a prime example.
Sure, go ahead and blow them off if you think they were rude. But don't make the mistake of thinking that they were asking you to do them a favor. You're going to end up doing it one way or another.
Date: January 26th, 2008 1:24 AM Author: contagious theater
I saw the emails one of the does sent asking for the posts to be removed. Rach told us he wouldn't remove them because she didn't ask nicely enough. He was wrong - I thought her emails were very courteous.
When they didn't take the threads down - a practice that is nothing new to xoxo - what did you expect them to do? Say "pretty please" again and again?
They took it to the next level. Big surprise. There's nothing wrong with doing that. What WAS wrong was the response. Totally stupid.
A lot of people who were convinced they were invulnerable are about to pay dearly for their naivete.
Date: January 26th, 2008 3:08 AM Author: contagious theater
I read the emails that were sent before RD stepped in. They were very polite. Rach and GTO did not comply.
Do I think RD helped matters? Of course. He was asked nicely and refused. Then it was time to ask in a not so nice way.
The Ps are getting what they wanted and the Ds are just losing more and more and more and they have dragged xoxo down with them.
Think about how much revenue GTO and rach have flushed on account of this alone. Not to mention a lost job for GTO and god only knows how much hassle and stress.
The only people who regret RDs involvement are rach gto and the Ds. LOL
If you really think they are going to risk anything at all on saving the ds necks you're wrong.
Date: January 26th, 2008 3:44 AM Author: contagious theater
Maybe you don't understand this board very well. It is entirely possible that these Neanderthals would have done the exact same thing even without RD.
They wanted posts removed. They asked nicely. They weren't removed. Did you expect them to leave it at that, to just give up without any further effort? That's foolish.
So what do you think they should have done besides contact RD? What tactic do you suggest they should have employed that would have gotten them what they wanted without RD?
None of it matters anyway - xoxo's overreaction and retaliation against the does after they did nothing wrong is NOT the does fault in ANY way. The Ds are entirely at fault. What the Does did is entirely reasonable and probably the only thing they could have done.
Date: January 26th, 2008 4:00 AM Author: contagious theater
I'd say that the Ds miscalculated far worse than the Ps did here. You mention the things the Ps got that they didn't bargain for.
The GTO bargain on losing his job? Did rach and GTO bargain on losing all of their advertising revenue?
Did all of the Ds bargain on having their careers destroyed?
Even the Ds who are never identified - if there are any - are still going to have to suffer many many more months of not knowing for sure. That alone is serious punishment.
I disagree. I think the Ds definitely miscalculated worse than the Ps. I think the Ps made exactly the right decision.
Date: January 26th, 2008 4:31 AM Author: contagious theater
Yep, looks like its a slam dunk victory for the Ds. Nothing to fear. Thank goodness none of the Ds ever aimed or emailed or met or spoke to GTO or Rach or AHWIAB or ak46 or pauliewalnuts.
Date: January 25th, 2008 7:25 PM Author: Slate High-end Hospital Community Account
My favorite part is where they asked GoDaddy for the relevant records which are clearly server based. They couldn't tell the difference between someone running the DNS servers and the organization hosting the data. Pretty incompetent.
Date: January 26th, 2008 12:01 AM Author: contagious theater
Shows what you know.
This is standard OP in the practice of law.
Of course they ask people who clearly won't have anything. The purpose of asking isn't only to get the info, it is to show that no more info can be gotten.
When Rosen posted notice of the xoxo lawsuit on the board last summer, he included a request for the Ds to contact him. He didn't do that because he actually thought that they WOULD. He did it so that he could say that he TRIED.
Date: January 26th, 2008 1:56 AM Author: contagious theater
I just don't get what you're bitching about. They need to show the judge that they did a lot of legwork. To do that you show the judge records that you tried to get info and couldn't.
If you read any of the materials, a lot of the replies said that they would hand over all the info once they were presented with a subpoena. GTO said the same thing.
Now they go to the judge. "See judge? We tried really really hard but we couldn't get the info we wanted. But we DID get a lot of responses saying they would give us what we want if we can provide a subpoena."
Date: January 26th, 2008 2:20 AM Author: contagious theater
No no no. You don't get it.
Remember all those replies that said that they DID have info, and they'll hand it over when they get the subpoena? BINGO. That's what expedited discovery is for.
GTO and Rach were on the subpoena list too and they have records. We know that they have SOME records and we also know that they were given notice to preserve records in March 2007.
If GTO is a smart man he will have kept ALL of the ip logs.
We know for a fact that they lied when they claimed they never kept IP logs, and we all know that they at least have some.
We also know that GTO has given the board a heads up - he said that he has files on the Ds, and that he would not fight it if the Ps subpoenaed him to hand them over. The Ps also want to depose both him and rach.
That means that every D that GTO and Rach can name is going to be outed.
Are we on the same page now? What do you fail to understand about this?
Date: January 26th, 2008 3:56 AM Author: contagious theater
LOL Some people will just cling to any tiny shred of hope no matter how wispy. Is stuff like this the only thing that keeps you from falling into the pit?
Date: January 25th, 2008 11:22 PM Author: Pearl Meetinghouse
There's a typo where "CGWBT" is mistakenly typed as "CWBT." I forgot to note the page number, but it's in the footnote with the cite to urbandictionary. Sloppy work, Keker.
Date: January 25th, 2008 11:28 PM Author: Pearl Meetinghouse
I have no idea who/what Rational Thought is beyond that one dude seems to spam certain threads that I post in saying I'm that. I don't know where this came about, and I think it's one psycho.
Date: January 25th, 2008 11:50 PM Author: Pearl Meetinghouse
I post and read threads about sports and law firm issues; pretty much nothing else. I totally block out the crap on here about posters and their personal crap. I don't care who's behind what moniker and worry about who is popular here and whatnot.
Date: January 26th, 2008 12:35 AM Author: Pearl Meetinghouse
Have I really been posting that long? I figure I started in the first few months of 2006, but I'm not really sure.
I post a lot, but on very specific threads. I block out 95% of the crap on here. I didn't even know about these two Yale girls and all the issues until there were stickies and notices at the top of this board about the whole reputation defender thing. Why is it so hard to imagine that someone doesn't give a crap about the personalities behind whatever monikers? I just want to talk sports and law.
Date: January 26th, 2008 2:25 AM Author: contagious theater
No I don't think you get it.
GTO has told the board that he has files on the Ds - and the Ps will subpoena him as soon as the judge grants the motion for expedited discovery. GTO has already told the board that he has info that will out some of the Ds and he cautioned them to retain counsel.
The subpoena seeks not only records, but also depositions from Rach and GTO. Every D that they can name is outed.
Also notice that many of the sources from which they requested info said that they will give the info over when the Ps present them with the subpoena. This is standard - they don't want to hand it over without a subpoena because they want to preserve the privacy of their customers, but they will not resist if a subpoena is presented.
Date: January 26th, 2008 4:20 AM Author: contagious theater
You didn't read very carefully. They DO have information. Don't take my word for it.
As for your second question:
The plaintiffs would be the best people to ask that question. They are proceeding with the lawsuit so evidently they find it helpful. I imagine if they decided they were not accomplishing their goals that they would end it. That has not happened.
Date: January 26th, 2008 11:46 AM Author: Citrine Stag Film
flip on who? we don't all hang out in a treehouse together when we're not posting on this message board...at the most, it looks like they'll be able to ID maybe 3 people (who may or may not be the primary culprits)
Date: January 26th, 2008 2:34 AM Author: Pearl Meetinghouse
I just thought of another thing... The subpoena for Autoadmit itself is presumptively pursuant to 30(b)(6). Is Autoadmit a legal entity, or just the name of a website? I wonder if that subpoena is even valid.
Date: January 26th, 2008 4:28 AM Author: contagious theater
It's valid if Rach or GTO respond to it.
Maybe they'll decide to spend a bunch of money to fight it? That way when they prevail the Ps will have to go to the trouble of correcting it. That will really gum up the works.
So, basically, the best-case scenario for the plaintiffs is that they end up sending subpoenas to ISPs for information about IP addresses. They won't have anything for them. In the meantime, they get more publicity for all of the defamatory comments.