Help - Online Posting Advice!

[anon4453]

What is the name of your state (PA)?

A posting was made about a former employer approx 3 months ago on a 3rd party website message board. I suppose it could be potential slander, even though the posting was only active on the site for 48 hours before it was removed. I wont get into details about the posting but the former employer is making requests to the 3rd party website to release information on the poster so they can find out the identity. email address, IP... I assume etc. The 3rd party website is now contacting the poster multiple times saying "Please contact us immediately, unless we hear from you to the contrary immediately, we will assume you have no objection to the request to release your information" Should a response be made? or is this a trick to get additional information and start the legal process? what should the response say?

Any help would be much appreciated, as this is very stressful!! THANKS!!!!!

 

[Zigner]

What is the name of your state (PA)?

A posting was made about a former employer approx 3 months ago on a 3rd party website message board. I suppose it could be potential slander, even though the posting was only active on the site for 48 hours before it was removed. I wont get into details about the posting but the former employer is making requests to the 3rd party website to release information on the poster so they can find out the identity. email address, IP... I assume etc. The 3rd party website is now contacting the poster multiple times saying "Please contact us immediately, unless we hear from you to the contrary immediately, we will assume you have no objection to the request to release your information" Should a response be made? or is this a trick to get additional information and start the legal process? what should the response say?

Any help would be much appreciated, as this is very stressful!! THANKS!!!!!

I would suggest that this isn't your business.

 

[quincy]

If you are the poster of libelous material about your former employer, and the employer has obtained a court subpoena and served it on the website to have your identifying information released, the website will release your information unless you file a motion with the court to quash the subpoena (to prevent the release of your identifying information). If you do NOT file a motion to quash, the website will release your identifying information pursuant to the court order.

In Pennsylvania, a person has one year from the date of first publication of defamatory material to file a defamation suit. It does not matter, really, how long defamatory material has remained online - a person can potentially show that reputational injury resulted even from material that was deleted after a short period of time, especially when the material was posted online. There is generally a wide "audience" to whom online material is made available for reading and it is this wide audience that matters more than for how long this audience had to view the material. Even if only one person other than the former employer read the defamatory material posted about the former employer, that is (generally) enough to support the publication element required for a defamation suit.

If a court subpoena has been obtained and issued, then there is a good chance that a suit against the poster has already been filed with the court (against a "John Doe") and that the "legal process" has already started. Many courts will require that a suit be filed first, before they will issue a subpoena to unmask a "John Doe" or, at the very least, a court will require that a prima facie case is made, showing that a suit has merit.

It would be very wise for the poster of the material to contact an attorney immediately, so that the attorney can review the contacts that have been made to the poster by the website, and so that the attorney can review exactly what was posted online about the former employer to determine its defamatory nature, and so that the attorney can assist in filing a motion to quash with the court (unless, of course, the poster does not mind having his identifying information released so that a suit against him can proceed).

It is important to note that you have only a limited time to respond with a motion to quash. You may have already used up this time by ignoring the multiple requests made by the website to contact them.

 

[anon4453]

Thanks for your response. I dont believe a subpoena has been issued yet, I'm guess I'm just not sure if the 3rd party website is trying to help or trying to pry for additional information.

 

[quincy]

I don't know what sort of information the website would be "prying" about that it does not already have. And, as a note, a court order is not necessarily necessary - a website could potentially release identifying information upon request, although this is no longer common in defamation suits and a court order will almost always be required by a website before it will release the identifying information of a subscriber to their site - although the site may remove the defamatory material upon request.

Have an attorney check out the communications made by the website, to determine if you (or the poster in question) has anything legitimate to be stressed about. It sounds very much like, from this distance at any rate and based only on what you have posted, that the website is contacting the poster because of a subpoena they have received.

 

[anon4453]

And, as a note, a court order is not necessarily necessary - a website could potentially release identifying information upon request, although this is no longer common in defamation suits and a court order will almost always be required by a website before it will release the identifying information of a subscriber to their site - although the site may remove the defamatory material upon request.

Thanks, I think this might be what is happening. The employer is asking for information from the 3rd party website without a subpoena, but the 3rd party cannot release without some contact from the poster. If no response is made then they can release the information.

 

[quincy]

Well, that seems odd, but I don't see how avoiding contact with the website is going to help the poster in any case. Again I will suggest a review by an attorney and, if this does involve a court subpoena, I suggest the review by an attorney be made SOON.

Good luck.