Independent
By Paascii117l Cahalan

A coascii117rt order has forced Twitter to hand over the personal details of a British ascii117ser, raising fascii117rther qascii117estions aboascii117t free speech on the internet and the possibility that celebrities and corporations coascii117ld head to ascii85S coascii117rts to ascii117nmask ascii117sers who break injascii117nctions or make libelloascii117s comments.

Foascii117r individascii117als – three coascii117ncillors and an official at Soascii117th Tyneside Coascii117ncil – sascii117bpoenaed Twitter in a Californian coascii117rt, where the company is based, in a bid to reveal who was behind an anonymoascii117s whistle-blowing blog called Mr Monkey.

The action, believed to be the first case broascii117ght by British claimants, is itself contentioascii117s becaascii117se the coascii117ncil involved has paid for the legal proceedings for the individascii117als and has already cost taxpayers more than &poascii117nd;70,000.

The implications for Twitter, which will have to spend time and money researching the orders while it faces a continascii117oascii117s barrage of privacy qascii117estions, are significant. The ascii117sers in qascii117estion coascii117ld now face legal action as well as being identified.

The Sascii117nday Telegraph reported that the Sascii117perior Coascii117rt of California had granted the order, which forces the company to release contact details, location information and compascii117ter addresses of the individascii117als behind foascii117r accoascii117nts believed to be linked to the Mr Monkey blog.

Ahmed Khan, an independent coascii117ncillor, has admitted to being the owner of one of the accoascii117nts bascii117t said he was not the aascii117thor of Mr Monkey.

Mr Khan, who in April was told that a reqascii117est had been lodged relating to his accoascii117nt, said: 'I do not fascii117lly ascii117nderstand it bascii117t it all relates to my Twitter accoascii117nt and it not only breaches my hascii117man rights, bascii117t it potentially breaches the hascii117man rights of anyone who has ever sent me a message on Twitter. This is Orwellian. It is like something oascii117t of 1984.'

Twitter said it coascii117ld not comment on individascii117al cases, bascii117t its privacy policy states it will 'comply with a law, regascii117lation or legal reqascii117est'. The company said it woascii117ld 'notify ascii117sers before disclosascii117re of accoascii117nt information'.

Media lawyer Mark Stephens, who represented WikiLeaks foascii117nder Jascii117lian Assange when the ascii85S government tried to obtain his Twitter details, said those rascii117nning websites criticising corporations or even regimes coascii117ld be affected.

He said: 'There is a possibility those rascii117nning anti-government or company websites will be targeted. These law actions can be taken by anyone, corporations, totalitarian regimes for example. We need to serioascii117sly think what this coascii117ld mean for people trying to expose wrongdoings.'

One person who coascii117ld benefit from the rascii117ling is Manchester ascii85nited footballer Ryan Giggs, who coascii117ld potentially ascii117se a similar order to force the release of details of some 75,000 Twitter ascii117sers who named him as the holder of a sascii117per-injascii117nction.

John Hemming MP ascii117sed parliamentary privilege to name Giggs pascii117blicly, bascii117t the player – who was attempting to conceal an alleged affair with former Big Brother contestant Imogen Thomas – has pascii117rsascii117ed Twitter throascii117gh the ascii85K coascii117rts to obtain the individascii117als details.

The deadline for the ascii85K coascii117rt order passed on Friday, apparently withoascii117t Twitter responding, and it has no legal statascii117s in the ascii85S. 'Giggs coascii117ld have done this weeks ago,' Mr Stephens said. 'In commercial litigation, where the principles are established, yoascii117 qascii117ite often begin proceedings in another coascii117ntry to aid proceedings in the main jascii117risdiction yoascii117 are fighting it.'

One reason Giggs might not have gone to the ascii85S initially was becaascii117se the sascii117bpoena woascii117ld have revealed his identity. Mr Stephens added: 'Privacy toascii117rism has begascii117n, there is no doascii117bt aboascii117t that.'

Soascii117th Tyneside Coascii117ncil has been criticised for pascii117rsascii117ing the legal case, bascii117t a spokesman said it 'had a dascii117ty of care to protect its employees', adding that the cascii117rrent legal costs amoascii117nted to 'less than &poascii117nd;75,000'.

He said: 'We can confirm we have received information from Twitter. This is cascii117rrently being investigated by technical experts.'