The December shutdown by a New
Jersey court of three H-1B protest sites accused of libel—ITgrunt.com,
Endh1b.com and Guestworkerfraud.com—has legal technology advocates up in arms.
The Electronic Frontier
Foundation has said the court is doing damage to the constitutional right of
anonymous free speech. New Jersey
had previously backed this right in the precedent-setting 2005 case of Dendrite
International vs. Doe No. 3, the EFF claimed in a Jan. 7 blog post.
An employee agreement contract for Apex Technology Group is at the heart of the
issue. The contract was anonymously published on Docstoc.com in December, and a
number of sites linked to the document and attracted a flood of comments from
anonymous users. To many of these commenters, the terms of the contract
appeared to make it very difficult to leave Apex once a contract was signed—which
is a major issue for H-1B visa holders who have seen illegal abuses of contract
terms. Examples of abuses include failure to pay employees on a regular
schedule and applying fees for leaving a job early or accepting employment with
other companies.
Apex denies any wrongdoing and sought to quiet the perception storm with legal
action by claiming libel, EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kurt Opsahl said in the
blog post.
"This order dangerously overreaches," Opsahl wrote. "By
restricting access to entire Websites, it places a prior restraint on all of
the speech on the Websites, even if that speech is unrelated to Apex or Mr.
Dharayan. Imagine if a court could order Amazon.com or Yelp.com shut down
because of a disparaging review of a single product ... The New Jersey court's
overreaching order shutting down these Websites also is inconsistent with
federal law to the extent that it holds service providers to account for user
posts."
The EFF is not alone in its dismissal of the decision and of Apex's strategy.
Other legal advocates, including John Miano, board member and treasurer of the
Programmers Guild, and Donna Conroy, an H-1B visa advocate for Bright Future
Jobs, have objected strongly to the shutdown of these sites.
"If this order stands, it will rob the security every American expects
when they post complaints anonymously or express their opinions online," Conroy
wrote in an e-mail to Computerworld. "It will create a credible
threat that Americans could face retaliation from any current or former
employer."
Apex said it has lost several potential employees because of the claims being
made about its business practices, according to Computerworld, but the EFF's
Opsahl said he doesn't understand exactly how the company can claim it is being
defamed by its own copyrighted legal document.
"Curiously, Apex simultaneously claimed that the document defamed them and
that they were its copyright owners," Opsahl wrote. "This is unusual,
since people rarely defame themselves with their own copyrighted works."
Opsahl went on to say the entire process the court has gone through in shutting
down these sites is highly irregular. From the post:
"Ordinarily, in order to safeguard this First Amendment right, a litigant
seeking to unmask an anonymous speaker would need to obtain a subpoena from an
appropriate court (i.e. Santa Clara county in California for Yahoo) and serve
the service provider. Then the service provider would provide adequate notice
to the user, and the user could move to quash the subpoena, asserting whatever
defenses the user may have. These procedures are vital to protecting speech
rights, and it was inappropriate and unnecessary for the New Jersey court to
short-cut that process, especially over a holiday period when [it] is all the
more difficult to obtain emergency legal assistance.
"Finally, it was wrong for the
court to require the upstream providers to unplug the website. Under New Jersey law,
injunctions should only reach those who engage in 'active concert or
participation' with the person who acted wrongly. There's no indication that
the upstream providers or domain name registrars for the websites even knew
about the postings in question, much less acted in 'active concert' with them.
Requiring domain name registrars to turn off websites in litigation about the
website is a tactic that has already been rejected."
Apex Technology Group applied for 23 H-1B visas in 2009, according to a
government-published list of 200 companies.