This is a friendly warning to several Shoq contrarians, cranks, trolls, exposers, whatever you want to call them. Point is, these people are misinformed about Twitter subpoenas. They think Shoq will
have a hard time serving Twitter with a subpoena to obtain their IP addresses.
In reality, serving Twitter with a subpoena is a trivial matter. All the plaintiff has to do is obtain a TRO (temporary restraining order). TROs in the US are automatically granted due to virtually no burden of proof placed on the plaintiff. See Wikipedia:
Trolls claim that Shoq Value has to file the paper-work under his real name. Not so! Because TROs are automatically granted with virtually no burden of proof, Shoq Value can file all the paper-work for the TRO as "Shoq Value", and still be granted the TRO.
If you think the Court cares whether plaintiffs use their real names when submitting TRO forms, you are mistaken. The court doesn't give a damn whether people use their real names on TRO forms of not. TROs are treated as a mere formality and are automatically granted. No one will take a second glance at the paper-work to check whether names, addresses, etc are accurate or not. Accusing the plaintiff of perjury is pointless; perjury with regards to TROs is almost never pursued. TROs are easy to obtain and virtually impossible to lift.
It's important to realize that in the event of a TRO case, the plaintiff doesn't even have to serve you to go ahead and subpoena Twitter; their lawyer will simply lie on the Twitter subpoena about having served you, even if he hasn't. Shoq Value can literally sue you behind your back without ever letting you know a TRO case is pending.
Think Twitter cares whether the subpoena is accurate or misleading? Do you think Twitter will look into it? Guess again. Twitter will gladly comply to a misleading subpoena, and leave it up to you to sort out the mess. Unless you have cash to burn on attorneys, good luck lifting the frivolous TRO (remember, TROs are almost impossible to lift), then squashing the misleading subpoena for which the frivolous TRO was the occasion and inducement.
All you misinformed trolls, consider yourselves warned. Contrary to what you claim, it is trivial to subpoena Twitter.
If you don't believe me, just ask "superlawyer" Kirk S Comer, who uses the above trick all the time. One of his clients filed her TRO paper-work using her pseudonym instead of her real name and was still allowed to proceed with a TRO case, which Kirk S Comer then used as an excuse to subpoena Twitter: