You probably think your tweets are n't of any interest to the government . After all , most 140-character posts are public , often detailing nothing more interesting than snarky jokes or links to adorable cat videos on YouTube . However , courts are increasingly subpoenaing Twitter for data on its users that can be used in criminal and civil cases . That 's what happened to editor Malcolm Harris . On Monday , New York Criminal Court Judge Matthew A. Sciarrino ordered Twitter to turn over Harris ' tweets and data from a three-and-a-half-month period , striking down the company 's request to quash a subpoena from the Manhattan district attorney . Twitter claimed that complying with the request would violate United States privacy laws . The case itself is over a minor charge that normally would n't draw much attention . Brooklyn resident Harris was arrested along with 700 other people during an Occupy Wall Street march on the Brooklyn Bridge 's roadway on October 1 , 2011 , and charged with disorderly conduct . If Twitter complies with the request , prosecutors would n't just gain access to Harris ' tweets ( which were public but have since been deleted ) , they would get a host of other information stored by Twitter that could be used as evidence in the case , such as Harris ' IP address , e-mail address and location information at the time of the incident . Monday 's decision could have far-reaching implications for the many other requests for tweets and other data Twitter receives on a regular basis , as well as users ' rights to challenge such requests themselves . `` We are disappointed in the judge 's decision and are considering our options , '' a Twitter representative said in a statement released to news organizations . `` Twitter 's Terms of Service have long made it absolutely clear that its users *own* their content . We continue to have a steadfast commitment to our users and their rights . '' The ruling also dismayed online privacy advocates . `` The court continued to fail to grapple with one of the key issues underlying this case : do individuals give up their ability to go to court to try to protect their free speech and privacy rights when they use the Internet ? As we explained in our friend-of-the-court brief last month , the answer has to be no , '' Aden Fine , a staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union , wrote in a blog post . Fine later added : `` The government should n't be able to get this sensitive and constitutionally protected information without a warrant and without first satisfying First Amendment scrutiny . '' In his ruling , Sciarrino speculated that the founding fathers would have quite enjoyed expressing themselves on today 's social networks . But while freedom of speech applies to Twitter , `` that is not the same as arguing that those public tweets are protected . '' `` There can be no reasonable expectation of privacy in a tweet sent around the world , '' wrote the judge , who went on to compare information posted on a public network to an eyewitness 's account of a crime on the street . In a smart bit of timing , Twitter on Monday released its first Twitter Transparency Report , detailing requests from governments around the world to get user information or suppress tweets during the first half of 2012 . There have been 849 requests for information so far this year ( for 1,181 individual Twitter accounts ) -- more than during all of 2011 , the report said . The United States leads the charge , with 679 requests for information , and Twitter says it provided at least some of the requested data 75 % of the time . Japan comes in second place with 98 information requests , and the UK and Canada tied for third with 11 requests each . Twitter is still banned in a number of countries , including China , Iran and Pakistan . When Twitter receives one of these requests , it automatically informs the user before taking any steps , unless prohibited by law , which is what it did with Harris . However , this is more of an admirable courtesy than a set-in-stone policy , since all users have already been informed that Twitter reserves the right to `` access , read , preserve , and disclose any information as we reasonably believe is necessary to ( i ) satisfy any applicable law , regulation , legal process or governmental request . '' A key issue in the Harris case that could affect similar subpoenas is determining who really owns a tweet . Harris originally filed a motion to quash the DA 's subpoena himself , but Judge Sciarrino dismissed it in April because he said Harris did n't own the information being requested -- Twitter did . According to Twitter 's terms of service , the user gives Twitter a `` worldwide , nonexclusive , royalty-free license '' to distribute tweets in any medium , even those that do n't exist yet . In May , Twitter added a line to its terms of service clarifying that users retain their rights to their content .
A New York judge rules that tweets are public information . Judge orders Twitter to turn over deleted tweets of Occupy Wall Street protester . Twitter also releases its `` Transparency Report '' of governments ' requests for info . The United States makes the most requests for user information , followed by Japan .