tpl motion14 brief

5/12/2018 Tpl Motion14 Brief - slidepdf.com

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tpl-motion14-brief 1/10

Form IS.OSA

2010 Yar. No. 328248

IN THE SUPREi,fE COURT OF NOVA SCOTL4.

BET\VEEN:

Trout Point Lodge, Limited, a Nova Scotia LimitedCompany

Plaintiff

- and-

Louisiana Media Company, LLC, a Delaware Limited

Liability Company

Defendant

BRIEF FOR MOTION UNDER RULE 14

Please Note: This brief accompanies a motion for an order revealing the identity or information leadingto the true identity of anonymous Internet posters. The order is to be directed at a third-party and not

the defendant

'The Plaintiff asks this honourable Court to take judicial notice of the following current publications

disseminated on the Internet, including any and all associated user "comments":

--http: /lslabbed. word press. c om /2 0 1 11 04 /2 61 slabbed-takes-a-look -at-the-trout-point-business-venture-

lets-start-at-the-end-and-~oLf.r~k-~b~a~c~k/:._ --------- _

-~http.://slab be .word press. ( ; 0 1 1 1 / 2 0 11/04/26/tuesday- usic-dedicated-to-a.afQu-and-the-girlsl

--http://slabbed.wordpress .c om / 20 1 1 /0 4 /2 21 and-now-a-word- from-our-sponsor/

--http://slabbed.wordpress .c om /2 0 1 1/0 4/2 21how-ironic- that -on- the-day-after-th e-drive-b y-shootin g-of..

the-nun-sisters-by-the-times-picayunel

--hUp:/1slabbed. word press. com/20 11/04/201 coming-soon-on-slabbed-we-examine-the-times-picayune-

trout-point-retractions-in-detaill

--http://slabbed.wordpress.com/20 11/041 19/tuesday-video-dedicated-to-the-girlsl

--hUp:!!slabbed. word press .com /20 11 /04 /18 /) 'e s -i -can-verify-that-trout-point-l odges-charles-leary-and-

tlle-soon-to-be-indicted-aaron-broussard-\vere-thick-as-thieves-up-in-nova-scotial

--http://slabbed.wordpress .com120 11/041 18/i-have-a-reply- for-the-times-picayune-and-their-laVlyer-

steve-gaynor/

--http://slabbed. word press .comf20 11/04/ 18/well- folks-this-trou t-point-thing-has-really:-rattled-some-

cages/

--http://slabbed.wordpress .c om / 20 1 1 /0 2/ 15 /j ohn-young- fire-f-unqualified-paral ega!s-fina IIy-wh ere-

the-heck-was-peggy-barton-and-her-blowbuddy-lil-pup-this-whole-time!

--http://slabbed. wordpress.comJ20 11/02/21!clue-the-grand-jury-versionl--http://slabbed.wordpress .com!20 11/0 2/24 iheU- wai ting-for-high-water-the-d evil-in- the-details-of-the-

flooding-of-jefferson-parish/

--http://slabbed.wordpress.com!2011/02/18/mirror-mirror-on-tlle-wall-server-was-it-one-enterprise-

office-after-all!

--http://slabhed .word press. comJ20 10/02/05/ anyone-el se-notice-chehardy-sherman-de-norrnad-their-

web site-hmmm/

http://--http//slabbed.wordpress.com/20

http://--http//slabbed.wordpress.com/20



In addition, the policies of Au tomattic and wordpress.com:

.~ht1p://automattic.com/privacy/

~-http: lien.su pport. word press .coml disputes/

As well as:

http://w\\·w.nola.com/politics/index.sst720 111 0 4 I r e traction -=troul....P0inUod~e.html

http://\,,,,\w.nola.comlnews/index.ssf/2010/01/newspaper_retracts_assertion_a.html

April 26, 2011

The Honourable Justice Pierre Muise

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Yarmouth Justice Centre

My Lord:

Please accept this brief accompanying a motion for an order under Civil Procedure Rule 14 for

Automattic.Tnc., a c05poration that.is the owner of a popular blogging web site to reveal information

leading to ffie identity ofcertain.bIQggers and posters on the blog slabbed.wordpress.com. There is

some urgency to this motion as the impugned bIog has launched a campaign of defamatory postings

related to the matters central to Yar No 323591 (now settled) and the current proceeding, which

publications also contain threats and harassment and encourage invasion of privacy.

Automattic, Inc. is a California corporation that hosts and publishes the blogging web site

wordpress.com. Wordpress.com in turn hosts a bIog named "slabbed," whose url is

slabbed.wordpress.com.

"Telemachusr and "unslabbed" are 2 registered wordpress.com users on "slabbed" ho maintain an

anonymous identity. Sop81_1 is the purported owner and publisher of-the blog, also anonymous.

Telemachus, unslabbed, and Sop81_1 have jlQsted material on slabbed.wordpress.com that:

threaten the WalntifF,'-------

is defamatory of the Plaintiff;

republishes defamatory material previously removed and retracted by The Times-Picayune

newspaper;

• demonstrates a connection to broadcasts and Internet publications made by the Defendant

Louisiana Media Company, LLC, including insider knowledge of Louisiana Media's reception

of Notice ofIntended Action in this matter as well as access 10 parts of the Aaron Broussard

interview requested but not disclosed by the defendant.

Automattic appears to have an explicit policy of being responsive to court orders and/or subpoenas. At

the uri http://en.wordpress.com/complaints/, Automattic states: Court orders: Official, signed court

orders can be emailedtocourt-orders@:wordpress.com.

At the uri http://en.support.wordpress.com/disputes/,Au1moattic states:

If we receive a complaint and are not in a position to make a determination (for example

whether something is defamatory or not), we generally defer 10the judgment of a court.

http://en.wordpress.com/complaints/,

mailto:emailedtocourt-orders@:wordpress.com.

http://en.support.wordpress.com/disputes/,Au1moattic

http://en.support.wordpress.com/disputes/,Au1moattic

mailto:emailedtocourt-orders@:wordpress.com.

http://en.wordpress.com/complaints/,



.'

However, in either case, we may take other action (or decline to take action) as we deem

appropriate based on the circumstances.

And

Inis Privacy Policy, Autornattic states:

Other than to its employees, contractors and affiliated organizations. as described above,

Automa ttic discloses potentially personally-identifying and personally-identifying information

only in response to a subpoena, court order or other governmental request, or when Automatticbelieves in good faith that disclosure is reasonably necessary to protect the property or rights of

Automattic, third parties or the public at large.

c Plaintiff therefore has a good faith Beliefihat an Order from this HOQol!lrabl€Court will be

followed hy Automaffic.

,

TelemaChUS, unslabbed, and Sop81_1 had notice of, and agreed to Autornattic's policies, including the

Privacy Policy. They therefore have no expectation that information leading to their true identities will

be kept confidential in a situation such as this. There is no right to defame or utter threats.

Defamation

The background of the publications made by Telemachus, unslabbed, and Sop81_1 are the reporting by

media organizations on what the slabbed blog labels as "the Jefferson Parish political corruption

scandal." The Plaintiff was erroneously, recklessly, illegally, and without substantiation referred to in

publications about the Broussard scandal by the defendant and others.

Background is contained in the amended Statements of Claim filed in this matter and Yar No. 323591

as well as affidavits filed in those matters.

In essence, Trout Point Lodge was misidentified as being Jefferson Parish President Aaron Broussard's

property, as being involved in illicit business activities involving I\Jr. Broussard, and as being a front

for criminal and unethical activity. Notably, the Defendant republished a defamatory publication of The

Times-Picayune newspaper on January 7,2010, for which the Plaintiff holds the Defendant responsiblein defamation.

Yar No 323591 is now the subject of a settlement agreement whose specific tenus cannot be disclosed.

The Times-Picayune published both a "correction" and retraction regarding publications it had made in

print and the Internet, including using the Plaintiff's image. A further and broader retraction was

published on nola. com on April 8, 2011 at http://,,,' \vw.nola.com/politicslindex.ssf/20 11104/retraction -

_trou1_point_lodge.html. It reads:



Retraction - Trout Point Lodge

In January 2010, The Times-Picayune published several articles that mentioned Trout Point

Lodge and its business dealings while discussing Jefferson Parish politics and the scandal in the

administration offonner Parish President Aaron Broussard. The newspaper retracts publication

implying that Trout Point Lodge was involved in the scandal.

The newspaper believes there is no basis for making any implication that Trout Point Lodge,

Limited or its owners, Daniel Abel, Vaughn Perret, or Charles Leary, were involved in any

wrongdoing and, indeed, never intended to make any such implication. The Metropolitan Crime

Commission complaint to the Louisiana Ethics Board about Broussard's vacation property in

Nova Scotia in fact did not name or implicate any of them. The Times-Picayune apologizes for

errors in its reporting regarding Trout Point Lodge and its owners,

The Defendant by contrast, has refused to.make any retraction whatsoever, including related to use of ..,.

the Plaintiffs image and video of its web site inmultiple TV and Intemet broadcasts. The refusal to

publish any retraction or correctiem fias allowed third parties, such as the slabbed posters, to believe

tl1at the identification of th e Plaintiffwith Aaron Broussard's alleged illegal activities is true and that

t h€ r e tr ac tions published by the Iimes.,Pica¥Une &e 12aft of a CQverup. "'

The Plaintiff was a subject matter of discussions and posting on the slabbed blog contemporaneous

with d,gfamatory publications by the defendant. Not all of the numerous slabbed publications referring

to the Plaintiff are defamatory. Publication of defamatory material is, however, ongoing and has

increased in the past 2 weeks in what is tantamount to a smear and hate campaign (Barrick Gold

Corp ..Y. Lopehandia, 2004 CanLII 12938 (ON C.A.», uses homophobic rhetoric as a rallying cry'.

.Publications before April. 2011

The first Times-Picayune retraction appeared on January 16, 2010. It was a direct result of th e

Plaintiff's efforts, including a Notice ofIntended Action.

Starting on Eebruary 6,2010, Telemachus andunslabbed revived the issues raised in previous

defamatory publications b~rmedia organizatie}fl-s,ineluding by the Defendant. Publications by

Te1em adius an d uflslabbe (lver .t!i~~erioQ @f.!}1Ql'ehan.a year refer at various points to the defendant's

Tv' and Internet publications. For example, immediately after hyperlinking to a letter fiorn Trout Point

Lodge published online, Telemachus stated as a matter of fact that "The TP [Times-Picayune] wrote a

correction that made it seem like everything reported about Nova Scotia was false. Well it wasn't" This

statement 1 S defamatory in that it referred to the Plaintiff in the context of an implied coverup of the

truth about the Broussard scandal by media organizations, and once again implicated the plaintiffs

involvement in a political corruption scandal.

In general, references on slabbed to "Nova Scotia" or Aaron Broussard's Nova Scotia properties within

the context of the "Jefferson Parish corruption scandal" include an implicit reference to the Plaintiff

particularly~i¥ef.l Telemachus' public repudiation of the Times-Picayune retraction. sop~n:1,Telemachus, and unslabbsd continued 'tfie aefamatory imluerrd@ that Trout Point Drdge-was A~arol1

Broussard's property and/or business; involved in shady dealings and the front for a criminal enterprise.

On March 8, 2010, unslabbed made.reference to the defendant a n a its reporter Val Brac)~ He/she statedthat \V\ U\E/Louisiana Media was being sued by th€ Plaintiff, which arthat time was-not true. The

Plaintiff in fact, was attempting to avoid litigation. The defendant hadtjust been served-with the

plaintiff's Notice of Intended Action in.an attemp1 to get a retraetion, KnoYc.l~dgeof such service of



legal documents points to a cloae association between ilie aefendant or its agellts and the slabbed blog.

Unslabbed continued in the same publication to use words:

• mocking of the Plaintiff

• implying that any investors the Plaintifi'might han are illegitimate or suspicious

• stating that the plaintiff had filed a frivolous lawsuit

• stating that the Plaintiff had knowingly sued an incorrect party• stating that the plaintiff had illegitimately "silenced" the free press

• Implying that the plaintiff feared investigation by the press, including the Defendant and

its reporter Val Bracy

On November 16,2010, Telemachus revived the subject of "Nova Scotia," which by that time was a

code word known to slabbed readers to reference the Plaintiff and its alleged connections to Aaron

Broussard, in the context of a federal criminal investigation.

On February 16, 2011, Telemachus republished the entirety of a defamatory January 10, 2010 Times-

Picayune article that had been removed from publication and/or retracted by that newspaper. The

"Mystery on the shores of Nova Scotia may be uncovered by ethics board" article contains defamatory

innuendo about the plaintiff, makes false statements of fact, and has little if any journalistic value. The

article also links the Broussard scandal to investigations of government deals involving waste disposal

contracts, particularly with a company called River Birch. Telemachus was, in addition to making a

publication referring to the Plaintiff that would tend to lower its esteem in the eyes of ordinary people,

also reviving in February, 2011 the whole gamut of defamatory implications and innuendo first

appearing in January, 2010, which the Plaintiffhad worked so hard to have retracted.

Telemachus then continued to dr.aw Charles Leary, Vaughn Perret, and Daniel Abel personally into thel

defamatory context, mentioning them and their business entities by name.

The stings of the defamation had by February, 2011, actually increased over January, 2010, as Mr.

Broussard was then publicly known to be the subject of a target letter from the Federal Bureau of

Investigation, and at least one federal indictment involving River Birch had been handed down. See:http://vllwwnola.comJpoIiticsiindex.ssf/2011l02/aaron _broussards_attomey _ says.html

Telemachus concluded his posting by suggesting that the Plaintiff. Leary, Perret, and Abel belonged in

the proverbial "woodpile" along with Broussard and others publicly implicated in the scandal.

On February 20, 2011, unslabbed published the suggestion that subpoenas issued to Jefferson Parish

officials in the federal investigation would result in Grand Jury testimony regarding topics such as

Aaron Broussard's Nova Scotia properties (by imputation including the Plaintiff) in connection with

charges of wire fraud, payroll fraud, and conspiracy.

On February 21, 2011, Telernachus again referred to the Plaintiff in the context of the Broussard

scandal and published suspicions about the Plaintiff's connections to persons-including public

officials- allegedly implicated in the River Birch scandal and the federal investigation.

On February 24, 2011 unslabbed made blog postings implicating the plaintiff in Nova Scotia being the

ultimate recipient of millions of dollars in monies paid by Jefferson Parish, while under Broussard's

direction, to government waste disposal contractors.

http://vllwwnola.comjpoiiticsiindex.ssf/2011l02/aaron

http://vllwwnola.comjpoiiticsiindex.ssf/2011l02/aaron



On February 2-5 .2011. Te lemachu s brought up th e lanu@,)' G,2Q10 television broadcasts of th e

defendant that 1'01111 causes of action in the current prQGeeding. He/she implied that the defendant's

journalistic investigation and broadcasts, which rei€n:ed to the Plaintiff, resulted in Aaron Broussard's

resignation. implying in rum that there was someili[ng sinister or mysterious about Broussard's Nova

Scotia PfQperties, including, inc(l)rr~etly, the Plailil'til1if.

Publications inApril. 2011: The Smear CampaifID

InApril, 2011, the posters on the slabbed blog began a smear campaign against, and "investigation"

into the plaintiff and it s principal owners. This campaign included threats and homophobic utterances

from unslabbed, including the following published on ARril 18 , 2011:

Welcome to Slabbed Danny and Carlie and Char lie an d :Vaughnie and an y of you Qilie r SpeGial

Guys oFiTrout P oin t an d Wild West.

NO\v I am VERY curious and inquisitive about you ... and ALL your BUDS.

May 1 suggest BOYS that you all huddle quickly and decide if the Inquisition sure to follow

continued attempts to GAG the Slabbed Nation is worth the information which will be elided in

protracted legal battles on all continents. Please remember that many of us enjoy Dual

Nationalities. Counsulate Immunities, and have LONG REACHING tentacles ... perhaps

longer than yours, although size is not really that important unless you are on the receiving end.

If! were you BOYS I would keep my head down, not bend over to pick up the soap and ride my

horses into th e sunset on Brokeback Mountain.

I,one Slabbed Nation member, vow to search you all out to the ends of the earth (Yes in

Switzerland, Hawaii, France, Italy, Canada and Spain) anywhere any of you have an y

connections.

Iave the time, temperament and now the impetus to set myself to this task. Hold on, it may be

a bumpy ride for some of you.

See ya soon, Cowboys.

Postings by Sop81_1 and others are also full of homophobic innuendo and rhetoric, and threats of an

"investigation" into the Plaintiff and its private business matters as well as the private lives of Abel,

Leary, and Perret. TIle slabbed publications and "investigation" constitute an invasion of privacy.

Notwithstanding .Jones v. Tsige,2011 ONSC 1475, with a very different set of'facts, there is

substantial weight to the argument that a tort of invasion of privacy has emerged in Nova Scotian and

Canadian common law. The court in MacDonnell v, Halifax Herald Ltd., 2009 NSSC 187 found:

[13] The plaintiff relies on what may be an emerging tort, invasion of privacy, and upon a

combination of the torts of conversion and breach of bailment as founding her claim 10 an

injunction preventing the Chronicle Herald from publishing ally of the remarks. She bolsters

her position on this by referring to s. 193 of the Criminal Code.

[14] Ms. Macfronnell relies on Somwar Y.Macllonald' s Restaurants of

Canada Ltd., [2006] OJ 64, and its extensive review of authorities. Somwar concluded that a



common law tort of invasion of privacy may be emerging in Canadian law. It is "not unheard

of". The court refused to strike a statement of claim based on the posited tort

[15] In Haskett v. Trans Union a/Canada Inc., [2001] OJ 4949, the court adopted a

passage from Dean Klar's text suggesting privacy is protected only under the

traditional torts and legislation. But, Justice Cumming said there is "some recognition

of invasion of privacy as an embryonic tort where there is harassing behaviour or anintentional invasion of privacy". That seems to me a sound conclusion to be drawn from most

of the cases reviewed in Soml'v'ar

See also, Nitsopoulos v. Wong, 2008 CanLII 45407 (ON S.C.); Sime v, Jupp, 2009 BCSC 1154

(allowing a claim based on common law invasion of privacy to proceed); Dyne Holdings Ltd. v. Royal

Insurance Company of Canada, 1996 CanLII 3672 (PE S.C.A.D.)

Notably, in a post by anonymous user "whitmergate" on April 21, 2011, he/she publishes a transcription

of the January 6, 2010 interview by Val Bracy of Aaron Broussard. The transcription-which cannot be

verified or authenticated-appears consistent with video material provided by the Defendant in

discovery to date. However , this transcription contains material never before seen by the Plaintiff and

never provided bv the defendant in discoveQ', including passages that were apparently elided or editedby the defendant in its publications and broadcasts in January, 2010. This points to another close link

between the slabbed blog and the defendant, and also suggests that the defendant has not followed the

Civil Procedure Rules regarding provision of documents and electronic information.

On A]2ril 26, 2011 Sop81_1 began his post at the uri http://slabbed.wordpress.com!201110~726 'slabbed-

t ake s -a-l ook-a t-t he -t rou t= poin t-bu s ine s s -ven IT lr e- le ts -s ta rt -a - the-end-and -work-b ack/sm ore-~~3 .

Ihink by now even our most casual readers know our successor website, slabbed.o~ TI' :as

knocked offiWe cOUl1esy of the Times Picayune's corporate parent Adyance

Publications an d this started a chain of events that resulted in Slabbed temporarily being

moved back to WordPress. I'd submit this was a miscalculation of gargantuan proportions f r

several reasons, which ,\~11become clear as I roll out this series of posts on Aaron

Broussard's connections to Trout Point Lodge ana its purported o'Wl1@rs,G;harlesLeary, Danny

Abel.and VaughnPerreL I say purported because etherswere sold 2% ownership interests inthe Trout Point dev~lepmentc.a-s touted byBrotrssatd anG mose folKS ate tlie bagnolders in this

;...rAnd he continued:

The blog's owner erroneously blames the Plaintiff and its owners for the independent actions of the

Times-Picayune and its law fmn Sabin, Berrnant, & Gould in requesting that SopSl_l's web server

host remove copyrighted material from publication. His/her explicit intention is revenge and is de facto

malicious.



In these posts, the slabbed blog builds on earlier homophobic, threatening, and harassing words and

innuendo to threaten ""aseries of Qosts," accuse the plaintiff and it s principals of being "bag men" for

A:aron Broussard, and of "fleecing" investors in . rouisiana.

I

Later on in the same post, Sop8l_1 accuses Charles Leary of perjury before Justice LeBlanc of the

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia in the now-settled case ACOA v La Ferme d'Acadie, et, al.:

Obviously there is a huge problem here _ that of a liar or in this case a perjurer keeping his lies

straight.

SopSl_l uses selective quotations from Justice LeBlanc's decision to his own illegal and malicious

ends. He/she uses Nova Scotia judicial decisions to confect and fabricate injurious material, to invade

privacy, and to disrupt the plaintiffs ability to carry on its business. Taken as a whole, the slabbed

postings are full of veiled and direct threats, libel, harassment, invasion of privacy, and direct

encouragement to others to invade privacy.

The Law

I"

\

l , '. . ,.

The relevant Supreme Court of Nova Scotia decisions on anonymous Internet poster/bloggers, under

the 2009 Civil Procedure Rules, are A.B. v. Bra~!l Communications Inc., 2010 NSSC 215 and Mosher

v. Coast Publishing Ltd., 2010 NSSC 153. Justice LeBlanc's decision was reviewed and upheld, on

other issues, by the Court of Appeal.

In both cases, it emerges as clear that Rule 14.12(1 )-rather than Rule IS-governs requests for an order

to take steps to reveal the true identity of anonymous Internet posters. As Justice Robertson found:

[6] I believe that an order for production under Rule 14.12(1) is more appropriate.

Ajudge may order person to deliver a copy of a relevant or relevant electronic

information to a part)' or at the trial or hearing of a proceeding.

[7] And I believe that these Rules are flexible enough to require such production in thepre commencement stage of an action, which is where you are. You need to identify those

individuals who have committed the alleged defamations and you cannot start an action until

you know who they are. Your requested order entails a process to identify the individuals.

[8] I have no problem in princi ple with your application and prepared to grant the

order. Because the court does not condone the conduct of anonymous internet users who make

defamatory comments and they like other people have to be accountable for their actions.



.'

InMosher, Justice Robertson appeared to accept the plaintiffs' assertions that postings on The Coast

web site 'were defamatory. The Coast did not oppose the application. No analysis of Charter rights,

evidentiary burden, and/or the existence of a prima facie case of defamation appears to have occurred.

In the Bragg decision, Justice LeBlanc applied a rigorous analysis, including reviewing an Ontario

appeals case. He wrote:

The appellants argued that production was not automatic upon establishing relevance and

absence of privilege, and that the court was also required to consider the John Doe defendants'

interest in privacy and freedom of expression. There was no dispute that the IP addresses and e·

mail addresses constituted documents under the relevant rule.

[12] The Divisional Court h~ld that Charter values were engaged by the proceeding. citing

R v. Sharpe, 2001 SCC 2 (CanLII), [2001] 1 S.C.R. 45 at para. 21 for the proposition that

"freedom of expression is among the most fundamental of rights possessed by Canadians" and

that "[tjhe values underlying the right to free expression include individual self-fulfillment,

finding the truth through the open exchange of ideas, and the political disclosure fundamental to

democracy" (para. 16).

Justice LeBlanc's ultimate decision was in accord with that in Mosher:

[22] As to the question of whether the public interests favouring disclosure outweigh the

legitimate interests of freedom of expression and right to privacy of the persons sought to be

identified if the disclosure is ordered, I am mindful that Chatter values of freedom of

expression and privacy are involved here, and that "[t]he requirement to demonstrate a prima

facie case of defamation furthers the objective of establishing an appropriate balance between

the public interest in favour of disclosure and legitimate interests of privacy and freedom of

expression" (Warman at para. 42). Defamatory speech does not Jose its character as defamation

simply because it is anonymous. In these circumstances, where a prima facie case of

defamation is established, and no public interest beyond the general right of freedom of

expression is offered in' support of maintaining the author's anonymity, I am satisfied that the

public interest favouring disclosure prevails.

The Plaintiff has established a prima facie case of defamation with liegards to the publications by

Telemachus, SopSl_l,and unslabbed listed above, particularly given the general context of publications

on the Broussard scandal. In addition, the anonymous posters have published on the topic of the

defendant's publications inlpugned in the Statement of Claim, and in two instances appear to be closely

linked to the Defendant. Ifno defendants in a separate aetion.fhey wi.ll be material witnesses in thecurrent proceeding;.... _

Finally, wordpress.com's published policies and user agreements state that Wordpress \-viIIgenerally

defer to the judgment of a court, inclaaing a non-U.S. Court. Such notices and agreement'S decrease toe__ .r

user's eXp':ectations of privacy, and put them on notice that there will still be legal consequences for .

their anonymous publications. As Justice LeBlanc stated: Defamatory speech does not lose its character

as defamation simply because it is anonymous. All users had to register with wordpress.com and agree

to the terms of the web site's policies.

The Plaintiff therefore asks this Honourable Court for an order instructing Autornattic, Inc. to provide

all documents or electronic information in its possession or control that would assist in identifying the



.,

wordspress.com users Telemachus, Sop81_1, and unslabbed.

ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.

Charles L Leary for the Plaintiff

tpl motion14 brief

Documents