Doe subpoena (English Wikipedia)

Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Doe subpoena" in English language version.

refsWebsite

Global rank English rank

5web.archive.org

1^st place

3bna.com

low place

2uscourts.gov

2,275^th place

1,288^th place

2cornell.edu

332^nd place

246^th place

2justia.com

696^th place

428^th place

1ceas.cc

low place

1kjk.com

low place

1pcmag.com

1,060^th place

700^th place

1citmedialaw.org

low place

1ssrn.com

703^rd place

501^st place

1delaware.gov

6,775^th place

3,885^th place

1state.az.us

low place

1mdcourts.gov

low place

1harvard.edu

18^th place

17^th place

1precydent.com

low place

1electronicdiscoveryblog.com

low place

bna.com

pub.bna.com

775 A.2d 756 (N.J. App. Div. 2001). Retrieved on 2009-03-15.
2000 WL 1210372, *8 (Vir. Cir. Ct. Jan. 31, 2000). Retrieved on 2009-03-15.
See O'Grady v. Super. Ct., 139 Cal. App. 4th 1423 (pdf)^{[dead link‍]} (2006) (holding that ECPA prohibited disclosure of emails in connection with a subpoena); Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Netscape Commc'ns Corp., 196 F.R.D. 559 (N.D. Cal. 2000) (denying FTC's motion to compel disclosure of customer information because of ECPA); 18 U.S.C. § 2703 (only government entities can force disclosure). But see Flagg v. City of Detroit, 252 F.R.D. 346 (pdf) Archived February 22, 2012, at the Wayback Machine (E.D. Mich. 2008) (finding that a subpoena can be used to force a party to consent to disclosure).

ceas.cc

Aaron E. Kornblum, Searching For John Doe: Finding Spammers and Phishers (pdf) Archived April 12, 2007, at the Wayback Machine, Second Conference on Email and Anti-Spam (2005). Retrieved on 2009-03-15.

citmedialaw.org

See Citizen Media Law Project's Guide to Potential Legal Challenges to Anonymity. Retrieved on 2009-03-15.

cornell.edu

law.cornell.edu

delaware.gov

courts.delaware.gov

884 A.2d 451 (pdf) (Del. 2005). Retrieved on 2009-03-15.

electronicdiscoveryblog.com

See O'Grady v. Super. Ct., 139 Cal. App. 4th 1423 (pdf)^{[dead link‍]} (2006) (holding that ECPA prohibited disclosure of emails in connection with a subpoena); Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Netscape Commc'ns Corp., 196 F.R.D. 559 (N.D. Cal. 2000) (denying FTC's motion to compel disclosure of customer information because of ECPA); 18 U.S.C. § 2703 (only government entities can force disclosure). But see Flagg v. City of Detroit, 252 F.R.D. 346 (pdf) Archived February 22, 2012, at the Wayback Machine (E.D. Mich. 2008) (finding that a subpoena can be used to force a party to consent to disclosure).

harvard.edu

cyber.law.harvard.edu

185 F.R.D. 573 (N.D. Cal. 1999). Retrieved on 2009-03-15.

justia.com

supreme.justia.com

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986). Retrieved on 2009-03-15.

law.justia.com

"Doe v. 2TheMart. Com Inc., 140 F. Supp. 2d 1088 (W.D. Wash. 2001)". Justia Law. Retrieved 2024-01-08.

kjk.com

Arko, Alexandra L. (2024-05-30). "How a John Doe Lawsuit Can Help You Unmask the Source of Fake Reviews, Defamation, and Harassment". KJK | Kohrman Jackson Krantz. Retrieved 2024-08-20.

mdcourts.gov

Court of Appeals of Maryland, Feb. 27, 2009, No. 63 (pdf). Retrieved on 2009-03-15.

pcmag.com

Bills proposed in both houses of Congress in February 2009 would require ISPs and wireless access points to retain records of IP addresses for two years. This proposal, if enacted, would not affect the retention policies of web hosting services, however. See Albanesius, Chloe (2009-02-20). "Bill Would Require ISPs to Retain Data for Two Years". PCMag. Retrieved 2009-03-16.

precydent.com

See O'Grady v. Super. Ct., 139 Cal. App. 4th 1423 (pdf)^{[dead link‍]} (2006) (holding that ECPA prohibited disclosure of emails in connection with a subpoena); Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Netscape Commc'ns Corp., 196 F.R.D. 559 (N.D. Cal. 2000) (denying FTC's motion to compel disclosure of customer information because of ECPA); 18 U.S.C. § 2703 (only government entities can force disclosure). But see Flagg v. City of Detroit, 252 F.R.D. 346 (pdf) Archived February 22, 2012, at the Wayback Machine (E.D. Mich. 2008) (finding that a subpoena can be used to force a party to consent to disclosure).

ssrn.com

Who's Exposing John Doe Journal of Technology Law & Policy, Vol. 13, No. 1, 2008

state.az.us

cofad1.state.az.us

170 P.3d 712 (pdf) Archived March 13, 2009, at the Wayback Machine (Ariz. 2007). Retrieved on 2009-03-15.

uscourts.gov

nysd.uscourts.gov

326 F. Supp. 2d 556 (pdf) (S.D.N.Y. 2004). Retrieved on 2009-03-18.
See Cahill, 884 A.2d at 455, n.4; but see In re United States, 157 F. Supp. 2d 286, 290-92 (pdf) Archived 2016-01-27 at the Wayback Machine (S.D.N.Y. 2001) (holding that ECPA, and not the Cable Act, applied to government access of internet subscriber records).

web.archive.org

Aaron E. Kornblum, Searching For John Doe: Finding Spammers and Phishers (pdf) Archived April 12, 2007, at the Wayback Machine, Second Conference on Email and Anti-Spam (2005). Retrieved on 2009-03-15.
Krinsky v. Doe 6, 159 Cal. App. 4th 1154 (pdf) (2008). Retrieved on 2009-03-15.
170 P.3d 712 (pdf) Archived March 13, 2009, at the Wayback Machine (Ariz. 2007). Retrieved on 2009-03-15.
See Cahill, 884 A.2d at 455, n.4; but see In re United States, 157 F. Supp. 2d 286, 290-92 (pdf) Archived 2016-01-27 at the Wayback Machine (S.D.N.Y. 2001) (holding that ECPA, and not the Cable Act, applied to government access of internet subscriber records).
See O'Grady v. Super. Ct., 139 Cal. App. 4th 1423 (pdf)^{[dead link‍]} (2006) (holding that ECPA prohibited disclosure of emails in connection with a subpoena); Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Netscape Commc'ns Corp., 196 F.R.D. 559 (N.D. Cal. 2000) (denying FTC's motion to compel disclosure of customer information because of ECPA); 18 U.S.C. § 2703 (only government entities can force disclosure). But see Flagg v. City of Detroit, 252 F.R.D. 346 (pdf) Archived February 22, 2012, at the Wayback Machine (E.D. Mich. 2008) (finding that a subpoena can be used to force a party to consent to disclosure).