'Web-Pest' Served Via Twitter

In a likely first, a British High Court has issued an injunction served via Twitter. The reason that a more traditional method of service was not utilized is because that was the only way he could be contacted as he was otherwise anonymous. The source goes on to say that this could set a "profound precedent", but as with the first Facebook occurrence (Berman Post: Australian Couple Served Via Facebook), the precedent value is for the same country; and is not precedent in the United States.

If this becomes more accepted, it would solve a problem in how to contact people that are anonymous. Being anonymous there is by definition no contact or identifying info; no snail mail address (work or personal), phone number, email, not friends/relatives can be utilized to find the person... . Basically, you are stuck unless you can use the same service the person is to contact them.

http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2009-10/british-high-court-issues-injunction-twitter-omg

"In what was no doubt the first ever 140-character legal document, the British High Court has served an anonymous web-pest an injunction via Twitter. This is the first time the microblogging service has been used to execute a court order.

The Court issued an injunction against an unknown Twitter member who used the name and likeness of a law firm owner (poor choice of victim) to spread conservative messages. The Court decided that the user had unlawfully impersonated the lawyer, one Donal Blaney, and that since the defendant was unknown, Twitter would be the best way to notify the criminal."