> I mean, you can cling to whatever fantasy you want, but it doesn't change the article:
It's not a fantasy but a recognition that Tse was incorrect. The US SC has held that both online speech and anonymous speech are protected by the First Amendment.
> The article goes even further to say "In other words, Glassdoor shouldn't be ordered to turn over 'anonymous' user data in any case solely based on U.S. law." And yet, this is exactly how Tse ruled.
That's what I just said. Tse was incorrect.
My comment clearly stated US and not NZ.