Twitter Fights To Protect Malcolm Harris' Tweets From Prosecutors

They're his tweets -- and you can't have them.

That's Twitter's message to prosecutors in the Manhattan District Attorney's Office, which charged Twitter user Malcolm Harris with disorderly conduct during an Occupy Wall Street protest and secured a court order requiring the social networking site to hand over information about Harris.

In a move applauded by the American Civil Liberties Union as a "big deal," Twitter has filed a motion to block the prosecutors' subpoena on the grounds that Harris, not Twitter, owns the content he shared with the social media service and that accessing it without a search warrant would violate federal law.

Twitter's lawyers also argued that under the Uniform Act, the prosecutors must secure a subpoena in California before requesting documents from a California company.

The subpoena, issued in January, called on Twitter to provide "[a]ny and all user information" related to Harris' Twitter account @destructuremal, including his email address and "any and all tweets" posted during a 10-week period at the end of last year.

Harris tried to quash the subpoena, but prosecutors ruled that he lacked the legal standing to do so because he had no proprietary claim to his tweets, which the district attorney's office likened to bank records.

In the motion filed Monday, Twitter takes issue with prosecutors' claims that Harris does not own his tweets, noting that this "contradicts Twitter’s Terms of Service."

"Twitter’s Terms of Service unequivocally state that its users 'retain [their] rights to any Content [they] submit, post or display on or through' Twitter," Twitter's motion stated.

The company also maintained that its terms of service give all users the right to attempt to quash a court order requesting information about their accounts.

"Our filing with the court reaffirms our steadfast commitment to defending those rights for our users," Twitter wrote in a statement to The Huffington Post.

Harris declined to comment on the case to The Huffington Post.

"Oh sweet, it's public. Twitter motioned to quash my subpoena all on their own, saying that I do retain rights to my content," he tweeted on Tuesday afternoon, followed by a post that read, "I'm thinking this bodes well for my request currently in to Twitter PR to borrow one of their giant blue birds and ride it into court."

The ACLU praised Twitter in a blog post for "stand[ing] up for one of its users."

"If Internet users cannot protect their own constitutional rights, the only hope is that Internet companies do so," wrote Aden Fine, a senior staff attorney at the ACLU. "We hope that other companies will do the same thing. Our free speech rights may depend on it.

Related on HuffPost:

From our partners

Comments

[mokando]

05:35 PM on 05/10/2012

Lock him up! Don't write checks your butt can't cash. Every tweet goes to the library of congress therefore making it public information.

http://blogs.loc.gov/loc/2010/04/how-tweet-it-is-library-acquires-entire-twitter-archive/

[PCPrincess]

04:06 PM on 05/09/2012

I just felt a little love for Twitter.

[acarrillo0989]

03:14 PM on 05/09/2012

Good for Twitter.

What would be even better is if they did not keep logs of tweets.

[jferg61]

01:00 PM on 05/09/2012

All Messages should be automatically erased once sent and that would end that! They do not need to keep records of messages. The small amount of evidence is not equal to the over powering need for privacy and personal rights!

[blood1]

11:48 AM on 05/09/2012

The demand for Twitter Info - what? How is that subversive or a threat? As a child, I learned that Sticks and Stones - aka the NYPD - will break your bones but words will never hurt you! Now fast forward a number of decades and now the DA wants to build a profile against a singular individual who was one of 700 who were corralled?
Aren't DA's supposed to understand the laws, or are they just minions of NYPD / Bloomberg police state and don't give a hoot about laws?

[Midnight Son]

08:01 PM on 05/09/2012

Almost every prosecutor has political ambitions. That should answer your question. ;)

[Sirah Manzoor]

10:45 AM on 05/09/2012

The San Francisco-based micro-blogging service filed court papers Monday asking a judge to quash a subpoena in which the Manhattan district attorney demanded the tweets and user information of writer and activist Malcolm Harris. Twitter’s Terms of Service unequivocally state that its users 'retain [their] rights to any Content [they] submit, post or display on or through' Twitter http://bit.ly/JdAH8i

[Lifeisdone]

10:22 AM on 05/09/2012

I think this is great and bad at the same time. If someone were committing crimes and uploading the evidence onto their twitter account does that mean the court can not get access to this evidence? Could a criminal go free because of that?

[Midnight Son]

10:30 AM on 05/09/2012

No. It means they have to follow the long established procedures spelled out in our Constitution. The prosecutor is on a fishing expedition here. He's not actually interested in finding evidence that Harris is guilty of a disorderly conduct offense, as they already have access to evidence involving that issue. Rather, this is an attempt to build a profile on people that Harris was communicating with from before "Occupy Wall Street" even existed, which the prosecutor has absolutely no legitimate legal grounds to collect. By pushing for the Prosecutor to get a warrant, Twitter is making it very clear that they won't be a party to such unethical fishing expeditions.

[Lifeisdone]

11:24 AM on 05/09/2012

Oh, thanx for explaining.

[jferg61]

01:07 PM on 05/09/2012

There are other ways for the police to get that information and the right to privacy and personal rights out weighs any amount of "evidence" they might be able to get.

[parabq]

09:14 AM on 05/09/2012

I have a whole new respect for twitter !!!!! Thank you ver much for protecting our rights.
its refreshing to see a compant that just doesnt roll over to this police state !!!!

[kauthon]

08:47 AM on 05/09/2012

Goooooooo Twitter.

[CgGardner]

08:29 AM on 05/09/2012

Kudos to twitter, instead of letting themselves be run over by the courts, they are standing up to them.

[A Dub]

06:48 AM on 05/09/2012

Great decision Twitter!

[lastpost]

06:44 AM on 05/09/2012

"They're his tweets -- and you can't have them."
We may not agree with what has been Tweeted. But we’ll fight to the death, for the right to Tweet them.

"Twitter's message to prosecutors"
Thought police are one thing. But tw*t police?

"Twitter has filed a motion to block"
But if the courts are successful, the next move may be users filing a motion to boycott.

"accessing it without a search warrant would violate federal law."
But would reproducing it without express permission constitute piracy, or infringement of copyright law?

"he had no proprietary claim to his tweets"
Its not as if they constitute intellectual property. Is it?

"Harris declined to comment on the case to The Huffington Post."
In case his observations were misappropriated, misquoted, and used against him in a court of law?

"I'm thinking this bodes well for my request currently in to Twitter PR to"
access those Tweets of the prosecution. As they may contain grounds for a mistrial.

"Our free speech rights may depend on it."
Since it seems constitutional ones aren’t worth the air waves they’re Tweeted on.

[Ichigo Kurosaki]

06:12 AM on 05/09/2012

Now you see the true difference between facebook and Twitter. Zuckerberg would sell you out without a court order.

[Shadow Diver]

07:51 AM on 05/09/2012

You should be a republican. Look at your motto. Why do you hate so much. Why do you make a statement that is puro hypothetical?

[El Chingaso]

08:57 AM on 05/09/2012

Hey, Shadow-man, ease up on the heuristics. "Labels" weaken your intellect...

[Ichigo Kurosaki]

06:12 AM on 05/10/2012

Not hypothetical. facebook has given up quite a bit of personal info to cops without a court order. This is a fact.
Pointing out the truth is not hate. Look in a mirror, before replying.

[kauthon]

08:48 AM on 05/09/2012

He makes the statement because it is correct.

[Will98]

02:29 AM on 05/09/2012

Way to go twitter.

[Npn Npn]

02:22 AM on 05/09/2012

Some good news for a change. Thank you Twitter.