Vegas newspaper to comply with narrowed subpoena

Vegas paper gets subpoena to ID online commenters

hosted.ap.org< br />

LAS VEGAS (AP) -- A Las Vegas newspaper says it has been served a federal grand jury subpoena seeking information about readers who posted comments on the paper's Web site.

One commentator said: "The sad thing is there are 12 dummies on the jury who will convict him. They should be hung along with the feds."

Another called Damm a "socialist, fascist Mormon" and a "Nazi moron."

(visit the link for the full news article)

Copy the EXACT Headline: BAN Guidelines

LeaderOfProgress: I did the AP changed the headline on me after the thread was started. I didn't go back to the original article afterwards. Never knew they changed it.

[edit on 6/17/2009 by semperfortis]

[edit on 17-6-2009 by LeaderOfProgress]

People, here on ATS we are going to have to watch what we say and how we say it. The government is explicitly coming after online posters who have a certain agressive tone to their post.

This case that was the one that the man tried to skirt taxes by giving coin money at face value when it was worth more in trade.

The comments said by posters are very reminiscent of posts that we see commonly on here. Though I hope that ATS would fry their servers rather than give up our identities, I still think it is risky posting such thoughts.

hosted.ap.org< br /> (visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 6/17/2009 by semperfortis]

reply to post by LeaderOfProgress


I agree whole-heartedly. These Federal prosecutors are itching to make examples of people dissenting. They are trying to see if they can grab a couple of people who skirt the boundaries and get away with it. It is almost starting to become reminiscent of the Gestapo's tactics. Nail a few who are just right at that line, make examples of them , then the line gets pushed back even further until no dissent is allowed. Very troubling.

Originally posted by LeaderOfProgress


People, here on ATS we are going to have to watch what we say and how we say it. The government is explicitly coming after online posters who have a certain agressive tone to their post.

While I am reticent to be a perpetual pessimist....,


Only for now.

If we are to expect that our communications are free of interference, and not otherwise sanitized for 'policy reasons' then we must accept the price to be that those who are so inclined, will speak their true mind.

Persecuting those who speak to evil intent and anti-social or criminal behavior should face the consequences of that stance in the actual medium, in the actual forum, and without the need for 'government' to be involved.

Soon this will fester into a more generalized and probably technology-driven effort to assess communicators based upon criteria over which we have no control; because it is implemented and developed by unaccountable parties.

[edit on 17-6-2009 by Maxmars]

No less than three times I have read of a similar case in the last week alone.

Just be careful I guess, huh?

Just begin and end every post with "hypothetically speaking..."

Here's the story straight from the R-J.

Las Vegas Review-Journal

If the feds really push this, I do think they will be in for a helluva fight. While this is a corporate newspaper - Linky To Owners Site, Stephens Media, LLC - they have always been a sort of independent. I never paid attention to their political picks, so I really don't know which side they play in the Dems vs. Repubs crap, but they have always had great, for the most part, opinion pieces.

In other words, they are one of the fairest newspapers I have ever read. Over the years I have cut out hundreds of articles to keep, something I did very little in other places I have lived.

There is still a remnant of the small town this place used to be, a sort of isolationism that occurs here and the R-J is a reflection of that. I don't read the R-J much anymore, preferring to get my stuff here at ATS, so I don't know what tack they have had over the last few years(I've been gone), but the publisher and editor haven't changed in some twenty years or so, so I just don't see them giving up on this fight very easily.

At least, I sure as hell hope so. We shall see what comes of this.

I personally would like the Administrators to come in and comment on topics like this. We feel pretty safe posting on here but should we? How safe are we? How far will ATS go to protect our privacy?

Do you see everyone's reaction?

"Better watch what you say..."
"Be careful....they're watching..."

This is EXACTLY the reaction the Fed. Gov't was hoping for. I'm not saying that the reactions aren't justified, I'm just saying that in case anyone didn't notice:

THERE JUST WENT THE FIRST AMENDMENT

reply to post by LeaderOfProgress


This inst the first time this has come up in conversations and I'm pretty sure I have read a reply from them basically saying over their dead servers would they provide this data. If this was to happen I think they said they would move the servers outside of the US.

Granted I have been wrong many times before and it could probably found using a search.

Originally posted by LeaderOfProgress
I personally would like the Administrators to come in and comment on topics like this. We feel pretty safe posting on here but should we? How safe are we? How far will ATS go to protect our privacy?

How far would ATS go??? I believe that it would be everyone for themselves if it came down to that. ATS cannot take responsibility for what I say on this site. They have rules that are posted, and I am expected to adhere to those rules.

reply to post by desertdreamer


The comments that were made by the posters in the articles examples were not directly threatening. The comments were hypothetical at best but more or less just venting of frustration over the topic at hand. Yes I believe if some one were to outright threaten another person on this site, the administration would step in and do what is right. In situations like in the article, would ATS protect us?