1996-08-22 - Re: CS First Boston lawsuit

Header Data

From: “Robert A. Rosenberg” <hal9001@panix.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: b9a21a5cf490292b390d73bb5423901863a2347192b31d10f8587bdae7c84f43
Message ID: <v03007800ae4058b9e5d1@[166.84.220.80]>
Reply To: <ae3d43f90a021004dcf8@[205.199.118.202]>
UTC Datetime: 1996-08-22 06:22:31 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 14:22:31 +0800

Raw message

From: "Robert A. Rosenberg" <hal9001@panix.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 14:22:31 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: CS First Boston lawsuit
In-Reply-To: <ae3d43f90a021004dcf8@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <v03007800ae4058b9e5d1@[166.84.220.80]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 3:29 AM 8/19/96, Alan Horowitz wrote:
>I suspect they are trying to get a judgement against "John Doe", in the
>hopes of tracking him down later.
>
>Actually, if I had a sizeable judgement against such a John Doe, I could
>probably find a private detective who would find the dude for a
>contingent fee. Wow, a whole new class of factoring (commerce definition)
>opens up. Get me a lawyer....


Since the messages were sent from an AoL account, I would assume that a
simple court order would be all that would be needed to force/require AoL
to release the billing-address records for the account. That would allow CS
First Boston to name the defendant. Refusal by AoL would just force CS
First Boston to add AoL as a co-defendant (until they supply the
name/info).







Thread