Embed Notice

HTML Code

<blockquote style="position: relative; padding-left: 55px;"><section><a href="https://infosec.exchange/users/dangoodin/statuses/114073150571881844">Dan Goodin (dangoodin@infosec.exchange)'s status on Thursday, 27-Feb-2025 23:07:52 JST</a><a href="https://infosec.exchange/@dangoodin" title="dangoodin@infosec.exchange"><img src="https://gnusocial.jp/avatar/92418-48-20240105201020.webp" width="48" height="48" alt="Dan Goodin" style="position: absolute; left: 0; top: 0;">Dan Goodin</a></section><article><p>It's not everyday you get to school a team of lawyers on the California shield law.</p></article><footer><a rel="bookmark" href="https://gnusocial.jp/conversation/4642209#notice-9086964">In conversation</a><time datetime="2025-02-27T23:07:52+09:00" title="Thursday, 27-Feb-2025 23:07:52 JST">about a month ago</time> <span>from <span><a href="https://infosec.exchange/@dangoodin/114073150571881844" rel="external" title="Sent from infosec.exchange via ActivityPub">infosec.exchange</a></span></span><a href="https://infosec.exchange/@dangoodin/114073150571881844">permalink</a><h4>Attachments</h4><ol><li><label><a rel="external" href="https://gnusocial.jp/attachment/4211112">Email:Dan Goodin &lt;dan.goodin@arstechnica.com&gt;1:22 PM (3 hours ago)to Rachel, Georgia
Your inquiries concern unpublished material I may have collected in the normal course of reporting the article referenced in your email. It is well-established case law that under Article I, section 2(b) of the California Constitution, section 1070 of the California Evidence Code, and Section 1986.1 of the California Code of Civil Procedure these are protected materials, even in the event of the filing of an otherwise valid subpoena.If you research me, you'll see I successfully invoked these shield law protections against Microsoft in 1997 or 1998 (I don't remember off the top of my head). It's a waste of your clients' money for you to pursue any of the materials you're inquiring about. Please let me know if you have questions or comments.Regards.</a></label><br><a href="https://media.infosec.exchange/infosec.exchange/media_attachments/files/114/073/148/187/077/101/original/10856cc8403ff7e6.jpg" rel="external">https://media.infosec.exchange/infosec.exchange/media_attachments/files/114/073/148/187/077/101/original/10856cc8403ff7e6.jpg</a></li></ol></footer></blockquote>

Corresponding Notice

Embed this notice
Dan Goodin (dangoodin@infosec.exchange)'s status on Thursday, 27-Feb-2025 23:07:52 JST Dan Goodin
It's not everyday you get to school a team of lawyers on the California shield law.
In conversationabout a month ago from infosec.exchangepermalink
Attachments
1. Email: Dan Goodin <dan.goodin@arstechnica.com> 1:22 PM (3 hours ago) to Rachel, Georgia Your inquiries concern unpublished material I may have collected in the normal course of reporting the article referenced in your email. It is well-established case law that under Article I, section 2(b) of the California Constitution, section 1070 of the California Evidence Code, and Section 1986.1 of the California Code of Civil Procedure these are protected materials, even in the event of the filing of an otherwise valid subpoena. If you research me, you'll see I successfully invoked these shield law protections against Microsoft in 1997 or 1998 (I don't remember off the top of my head). It's a waste of your clients' money for you to pursue any of the materials you're inquiring about. Please let me know if you have questions or comments. Regards.
  https://media.infosec.exchange/infosec.exchange/media_attachments/files/114/073/148/187/077/101/original/10856cc8403ff7e6.jpg

Public

Embed Notice

HTML Code

Corresponding Notice