Attempt to Vanish, to the Fourth Power: Turtles All the Way Down

I wrote last week about an attempt to vanish my article about an attempt to vanish my article about an attempt to vanish other articles ("attempt to vanish" here referring to asking Google to remove items from its indexes, so that they disappear from search results). Now I see an attempt to vanish that article as well, submitted the day I posted the article. For more details, I reproduce that article below.

Of course, I'm not the only target of this attempted vanishing campaign. The backstory is that a somewhat noted lawyer Kelly Hyman (see, e.g., this 2021 People story) had sued her father and former Miami Beach mayor Alex Daoud, which led to a good deal of media coverage (see, e.g., this CBS News story).

In 2020 and 2021, there were attempts to get those stories discussing the lawsuit deindexed by Google; I wrote about those attempts. In recent months, there have been five more such attempts, including the one linked to in the first paragraph, the one I wrote about last week, and the ones here, here, and here.

Of course, I'm relatively small potatoes when it comes to the targets: The deindexing requests also target articles in CBS News, the Miami Herald, the Daily Mail, the real estate news site The Real Deal, and the Daily Business Review (South Florida), as well as a blog (ConlinPA.com) run by another lawyer. Two of the requests purport to come from "Kelly Hyman" and "The Hyman Law Firm, P.A.," though I should note that the sender's name isn't verifiable, so I can't be sure who sent them; all I know is that the requests were aimed to remove articles that mentioned Hyman's lawsuit.

The last request I mentioned, by the way, differs from the others, since it's not based on the court order I describe below. Rather, it says,

DESCRIPTION My name is trademark and they are using my name without my permission
ORIGINAL URLS: https://trademark-genius.com/3/searchDetails?id=62ac2fc048370f4c2c31b714
ALLEGEDLY INFRINGING URLS: https://conlinpa.com/2016/04/03/hyman-v-daoud/

As you might gather, you can't stop people from writing about you by registering your name as a trademark.

[* * *]

Here's that post from last week:

I wrote about Hyman v. Daoud, a case that sought the takedown of various online items—including mainstream media articles—in November 2020. I then wrote in 2021 about an attempt to get Google to deindex my article (among others), aimed at causing it to disappear from search results. And four days ago Google got the following takedown request from someone, seeking to deindex my 2020 and 2021 articles, plus various other media articles:

Re: Unknown

NOTICE TYPE: Court Order

Explanation of Court Order

Pursuant to the confidential , court order, which states the following:

FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that within ten (10) of being furnished a copy of this Order any internet-related services, internet service provider, host provider and/or search engine shall remove and cause to be removed from any Site (including the web sites themselves and all URLS and links, even if they change) all statements, posts, social media, or videos or documents related to directly or indirectly to this lawsuit, and/or Kelly Hyman, Paul G. Hyman, Jr., Kaylee Hyman and Zachary Hyman and/or any website or posting defamatory, slander, or any statements against Kelly Hyman, Paul G. Hyman, Jr., Kaylee Hyman and Zachary Hyman on the internet, television, radio, print or any other forms of media including, but not limited to the Sites …

TARGETED URLS:

1. http://conlinpa.com/2016/04/03/hyman-v-daoud/
2. https://beforeitsnews.com/libertarian/2020/11/an-odd-response-from-one-of-the-lawyers-in-the-kelly-hyman-v-alex-daoud-case-2763652.html
3. https://reason.com/volokh/2020/11/24/overbroad-injunction-used-to-try-to-vanish-articles-about-daughters-property-lawsuit-against-father/
4. https://reason.com/volokh/2021/02/19/attempt-to-vanish-my-article-about-attempt-to-vanish-other-articles/
5. https://therealdeal.com/miami/2014/11/18/judge-former-miami-beach-mayor-can-stay-in-his-home/
6. https://www.cbsnews.com/miami/news/notorious-father-faces-eviction-by-daughter/
7. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2672285/Disgraced-former-Miami-Beach-mayor-court-battle-daughter-million-dollar-home.html
8. https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/miami-beach/article3985285.html

The order I wrote about was attached to the request. Though the request claims the court order is confidential, that's not true: I just confirmed that the order is available on the Miami-Dade County court records site (search for local case number 2012-044972-CA-01 and go to docket number 38). Based on my research on how Google deals with such matters, I very much doubt that Google will actually deindex my articles based on this request.

I e-mailed Ms. Hyman to ask her for some more explanation for what was thought to be defamatory or confidential here. I can't be sure that she was the one who submitted this request, directly or through an agent, but she would seem to be the likely beneficiary; and in 2020 she had e-mailed me to ask me to remove my post, though I said no to that request. I have not heard back from her, but if I do, I will post an update.

Here's the original post:

[* * *]

Alex Daoud had been mayor of Miami Beach from 1985 to 1991, but was then convicted of bribery and various other charges. Some years later, he arranged a real estate deal together with his daughter, Kelly Hyman (a lawyer and occasional political commentator)—but that went bad, and led her to sue him. The case dragged on for years, and unsurprisingly got a good deal of media coverage, such as in the Miami Herald, on the local CBS affiliate, and in the Real Deal (South Florida Real Estate News).

Hyman also alleged that Daoud or people working with him had posted various derogatory things about Hyman and her family (which includes her husband Paul Hyman, a retired federal bankruptcy judge), at sites named "atrociousattorney.com," "avariciousadulteress.com," "despicabledaughter.com," and the like. As a result, the parties entered into an Agreed Order to Take Down Internet Posting Related to Kelly Hyman, Paul G. Hyman, Jr., [and other family members], in which Daoud was ordered to remove such posts.

So far, that's fine; parties are generally entitled to enter into such agreements. But here's the twist: After imposing the obligations on Daoud (who was a party to the agreement), the order went on to purport to bind third parties, who weren't parties (and to my knowledge weren't even notified that their rights were being adjudicated):

FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that within ten (10) of being furnished a copy of this Order any internet-related services, internet service provider, host provider and/or search engine shall

i. remove and cause to be removed from any Site (including the web sites themselves and all URLS and links, even if they change) all statements, posts, social media, or videos or documents related to directly or indirectly to this lawsuit, and/or [the Hymans] and/or any website or posting defamatory, slander, or any statements against [the Hymans] … including, but not limited to the Sites [listed earlier in the order].

ii. remove and cause to be removed any derogatory references to Kelly Hyman including, but not limited to any reference to Hyman as an "adulteress," "blackmailer," "whore," "despicable," "liar," and/or any derogatory and/or negative comment about Kelly Hyman.

iii. remove or cause to be removed any derogatory reference to Paul G. Hyman, Jr., including, but not limited to any reference to him as "prenup paul," any judicial complaint and/or any derogatory comment about him including but not limited to any alleged misconduct.

iv. remove and cause to be removed statements, documents, videos, and/or postings about this lawsuit, Kelly Hyman v. Arnold Daoud; related to the house located at 1750 Michigan Ave, Miami Beach, Florida; any communication between Kelly Hyman and Arnold "Alex" Daoud; and/or any libelous, defamatory, and/or slanderous websites, videos, internet posts and/or social media posts about [the Hymans], which was or is created directly or indirectly by Daoud.

And Google has indeed been asked, on the strength of this order, to deindex not just items that may have been posted by Daoud, but also mainstream media articles (see here and here):

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/miami-beach/article3985285.html
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/miami-beach/article1972934.html
https ://miami.cbslocal.com/2014/06/27/notorious-father-faces-eviction-by-daughter/
https://therealdeal.com/miami/2014/11/18/judge-former-miami-beach-mayor-can-stay-in-his-home/
https://therealdeal.com/miami/2014/06/27/former-miami-beach-mayor-battles-daughter-over-home/
https://www.law.com/dailybusinessreview/almID/1202676995842/Why-Judge-is-Dismayed-and-Disappointed-Over-1M-Fight-Between-Father-Daughter/

And Google was also asked to deindex two items that criticize Judge Paul Hyman, which do not appear to be linked to Daoud, and which in any case consist of copies of documents filed in other matters:

http://www.judgewatch.org/CJA-members/Gwynn/gwynn-exhibits%201-9.pdf
https://www.yumpu.com/es/document/view/13292106/judicial-complaint-against-judge-paul-g-hyman-by

This appears to be the court's fully approving an order proposed by Ms. Hyman's lawyers.

I expect that Google will see through this, and will realize that it's not actually bound by the order (despite what the order says), because it had never been made a party to the case (and wasn't acting in concert with a party). And I expect that Google will also conclude that it shouldn't deindex the mainstream media pages (and the criticisms of Judge Hyman) even voluntarily, because there's no basis for thinking that there's anything false and defamatory there.

Still, I think the court erred in approving the overbroad agreed order, which on its face purports to bind entities that had never agreed to it. (I have e-mailed Kelly Hyman and her lawyers to get their side of the story, but haven't heard back from them.) [UPDATE: See here for an odd response I got from one of the lawyers after I put up the original 2020 post.]