“Litterbug,” we want your response

If you were the “Litterbug” and Tim Rogers recently called you out (see here), we want to hear from you. We’d like you to have the chance to respond publicly. Contact us!

UPDATE: Now that Tim has taken down the “Open Letter to a Litterbug” we have also taken down the alleged litterbug’s name. No point in keeping it out there.


4 Responses to “Litterbug,” we want your response

  1. Daniel says:

    Who doesn’t have a Facebook page these days?! [redacted] cerainly does. I sent her this message:

    Tim Rogers, editor of the local blog “Front Burner,” saw you flick a cigarette butt out your car window and actuall took the time to look up your license plate number and single you out, by name, on the aforementioned (fairly popular) blog.

    I tell you this because I think it’s very uncool — his printing your name, that is, not your flicking the butt (which who hasn’t done) — and if it were me, I’d want to know.


    Additionally, the post has been commented on, unfavorably, on the following blog — which was started only a day or two ago, when FrontBurner ceased to allow comments.


    I comment there under the name “Daniel.”

  2. Robert says:

    I don’t understand how Mr. Rogers is allowed to obtain or disclose her personal information like that. I’m just not seeing how any of the exceptions to the Driver Privacy Protection Act apply here.

    Any law-practicing LodoWickians care to comment?
    Title 18 U.S.C. Section 2721, 2724
    (a) Cause of Action.— A person who knowingly obtains, discloses or uses personal information, from a motor vehicle record, for a purpose not permitted under this chapter shall be liable to the individual to whom the information pertains, who may bring a civil action in a United States district court.
    (b) Remedies.— The court may award—
    (1) actual damages, but not less than liquidated damages in the amount of $2,500;
    (2) punitive damages upon proof of willful or reckless disregard of the law;
    (3) reasonable attorneys’ fees and other litigation costs reasonably incurred; and
    (4) such other preliminary and equitable relief as the court determines to be appropriate.

  3. Craig says:

    At first, I was going to say that this Federal law applies only to employees of the various Department of Motor Vehicles, but section 2722 disabused me of that.

    If I were Tim or his lawyer (but I don’t work at HayBoo, so I’m not), I’d say that his actions fall under one of the exceptions in section 2721 that say when such disclosure is permitted — specifically, subsection (b)(14): “For any other use specifically authorized under the law of the State that holds the record, if such use is related to the operation of a motor vehicle or public safety.”

    Shoehorning, for sure, but a possibility.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: