Country | Number of requests | Percentage of requests where some or all information was produced | Number of sites specified |
---|---|---|---|
Argentina | 1 | 0% | 1 |
Australia | 1 | 0% | 1 |
Austria | 1 | 0% | 1 |
Brazil | 6 | 0% | 11 |
Canada | 1 | 0% | 1 |
Costa Rica | 1 | 0% | 1 |
France | 8 | 0% | 9 |
Germany | 5 | 0% | 5 |
India | 27 | 0% | 29 |
Italy | 4 | 0% | 5 |
Malta | 1 | 0% | 1 |
Moldova | 2 | 0% | 3 |
Poland | 1* | 100% | 1 |
Scotland | 1 | 0% | 1 |
Singapore | 1 | 0% | 1 |
Spain | 5 | 0% | 5 |
Sweden | 1 | 0% | 1 |
Switzerland | 2 | 0% | 2 |
United Kingdom | 3 | 0% | 3 |
United States | 38* | 82% | 43 |
Total | 110 | 29% | 125 |
Recent Examples
Here are a few recent examples of requests for user information that we received from government sources. We did not provide information in response to any of these requests.
Austria
- The Public Prosecutor’s office requested a site owner’s data because their site contained allegedly defamatory content about a judge of a regional court.
Brazil
- A Police Inspector requested information about a site that was not created by the Authority or with the Authority’s permission, about “an important Authority of the Brazilian Judicial Branch” that contained “photos, videos, and citations.”
Canada
- Law enforcement requested information about a user who blogged anonymously and critically about their unpleasant experience with law enforcement while trying to report sexual assault.
France
- The National Gendarmerie requested information about sites that allegedly defamed an entrepreneur, his business practices, and products.
India
- Law enforcement requested information about a user who created a “fake blog,” that contained allegedly defamatory content and “vulgar/obscene comments in vernacular language about the complainant.”