Journalists ordered to reveal sources in harassment suit against eBay

The journalists behind an online e-commerce news site were ordered by a federal court on Sept. 25, 2024, to turn over the identities of sources who stopped working with them as a result of a 2019 campaign of harassment and intimidation at the hands of then-eBay employees. An attorney representing the journalists argues there’s nothing to turn over.

David and Ina Steiner, a married couple who run the Massachusetts-based news site EcommerceBytes, were targeted by seven employees after publishing an article in August 2019 about litigation involving the online retailer. The seven were later convicted and eBay was fined $3 million.

In July 2021, the Steiners filed a federal lawsuit in Boston against eBay, the former executives and the seven co-conspirators, alleging they suffered emotional, psychological and financial harm as a result of the harassment campaign.

As part of discovery in that lawsuit, eBay filed a motion in September 2024 asking that the court compel the Steiners to disclose the identities of “would-be sources” who were fearful of working with the journalists following the harassment.

The Steiners had previously released redacted copies of communications wherein sources asked that their names not be published or advertisers withdrew their business, citing a fear of retaliation from eBay or cyberbullying.

In a filing in opposition to eBay’s motion, an attorney representing the Steiners wrote that the request was moot, as there are no potential sources that they could identify. Attorney Todd Garber added that the motion should still be denied, however, as granting it could have a chilling effect on potential confidential sources.

“Sources came forward on the premise of anonymity for fear of retaliation, a very real fear given the facts of this case,” Garber wrote. “eBay’s motion threatens the free flow of information because if granted it would send fear down any confidential sources’ spine that the disclosure of their identities is very much at risk and promises of confidentiality cannot be upheld.”

During a hearing on Sept. 25, Law360 reported, Garber reiterated that there are no further documents or information to produce in response to the request. Magistrate Judge Paul Levenson expressed frustration during the hearing and largely sidestepped arguments over reporter’s privilege.

“It sounds like what you’re saying essentially is ‘we can’t identify any particular person who says they will no longer work with us, but that it stands to reason that such people would exist, and we just don’t know who they are,’” Levenson said.

The judge also asked why that wouldn’t be a correct and full answer to eBay’s request. Garber said it would be and that he would state as much in his response, which Levenson ordered him to provide by the end of the week, Law360 reported.

By granting the motion to compel, however, the judge placed an obligation on the Steiners to provide the identities of such “would-be sources” if they learn of them at any point before the case is resolved.