Back to publications
Raphaël Molina, Partner INFLUXIO
INFLUXIO LawyersRaphaël Molina
Partner4 min readUpdated on

Obtaining the identity of an anonymous Gmail user: a blackmail victim wins in emergency proceedings.

Receiving blackmail messages from an anonymous address is not a dead end. An order of the Paris judicial court dated 27 October 2025 confirms that a victim can obtain, in urgent proceedings and without any prior criminal complaint, the identity of the holders of the accounts used. This article sets out the conditions, the data actually disclosed and the timetable for action.

I need help
§In brief

How do you identify the sender of an anonymous blackmail email ?

The victim can apply to the urgent-applications judge under Article 145 of the French Code of Civil Procedure to have Google ordered to disclose the identification data attached to the disputed Gmail accounts. Data declared by the user is accessible as soon as a criminal offence is conceivable; IP addresses are disclosed only for serious crime, which covers blackmail and harassment coupled with threats to publish.

INFLUXIO Expertise

The protection of anonymity on the Internet is a widely recognized principle. However, it is not absolute. When a person is a victim of serious offenses committed from an anonymous email address, it is possible, under strictly defined conditions, to obtain a court order to lift this anonymity.

This is perfectly illustrated by a decision rendered on October 27, 2025, by the Judicial Court of Paris, ruling in summary proceedings (TJ Paris, 27 Oct. 2025, n° 25/55080 \\ [1\\]).

Seized by a woman who was a victim of harassment and blackmail by email, the Judicial Court of Paris, ruling in summary proceedings, ordered Google to transmit to her all identification data in its possession concerning the holders of two anonymous Gmail accounts, provided that these data are legally retained and have been provided by the users.

01

The facts: anonymous blackmail sent from two Gmail accounts.

The plaintiff's daughter, born from a previous marriage, had filed a criminal complaint for sexual offenses that she attributed to her stepfather.

Shortly after filing this complaint, Ms. \\[C\\] began to receive anonymous emails.

Their contents are threatening: the author claims to possess information about the complaint and threatens to publish documents concerning the family's private life on social networks. These threats are accompanied by several anonymous phone calls, coming from numbers clearly generated by anonymization applications.

The facts could constitute several serious offenses: blackmail (Article 312-10 of the Penal Code), harassment (Article 222-33-2), and invasion of privacy (Article 226-1).

02

On what basis can the sender's identification be sought?

In order to react, Ms. \\[C\\] initiated summary proceedings based on Article 145 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

This text allows for the obtainment of investigative measures before any trial, when there is a legitimate reason to preserve or establish proof of facts upon which the resolution of a dispute may depend.

She therefore requested the President of the Judicial Court of Paris to enjoin Google Ireland Limited and Google LLC to provide her with all identification data of the holders of the Gmail accounts used to send her the threatening messages.

The court granted her request.

No prior criminal complaint is required: civil urgent proceedings are enough to obtain identification, provided the legitimate reason is made out.

At a glance

Identifying an anonymous sender: which procedural route?

  • Urgent application for disclosure of data

    Legal basis
    Article 145 of the Code of Civil Procedure
    What it achieves
    Obtain the identification data held by the platform
    Timing
    A few weeks
  • Expedited proceedings on the merits

    Legal basis
    Article 6-3 of the LCEN
    What it achieves
    Obtain identification and, at the same time, the end of the harm
    Timing
    Weeks to months
  • Criminal complaint

    Legal basis
    Blackmail, harassment, threats
    What it achieves
    Trigger an investigation and judicial requisitions
    Timing
    Depends on the action taken
  • Complaint with civil-party application

    Legal basis
    Article 85 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
    What it achieves
    Bring the matter before an investigating judge if the prosecutor takes no action
    Timing
    Several months
03

Which data must platforms retain?

The obligation for electronic communication service providers to retain data is provided for in Article L34-1 of the Postal and Electronic Communications Code.

This text, supplemented by Decree No. 2021-1361 of October 20, 2021, enjoins platforms to retain several types of data, distinguishing between information voluntarily entered by the user during registration and identification data of the connection source (IP addresses).

Data voluntarily entered by the user may include:

- information relating to the user's civil identity (name, surname, address, etc.), - information provided during account creation (pseudonyms, associated addresses, etc.), - payment information.

This identity information can be obtained in any judicial proceeding, including in defamation cases, when a criminal offense is potentially constituted.

Conversely, technical data such as IP addresses can only be transmitted for the purposes of combating serious crime and delinquency (cyberstalking, blackmail, etc.), in accordance with the provisions of point 3° of II bis of Article L34-1 and IV of Article R10-13 of the Postal and Electronic Communications Code.

Thus, only certain criminal offenses (the most serious) can lead to the communication of IP addresses by platforms, which can be regrettable given the importance of this data.

The dividing line is clear: declared data can be obtained in any proceedings, IP addresses require serious crime.

04

What exactly did the urgent-applications judge order?

The court favorably granted Ms. \\[C\\]'s request and ordered Google to provide her with all identification data in its possession concerning the disputed accounts, namely:

- the names and surnames, or the corporate name, of the account holders, - the associated postal and email addresses, - the telephone numbers, - the IP addresses used during account creation, - connection times and dates.

Google Ireland Limited and Google LLC have 15 business days to comply, without having the right to inform the targeted users of the identification request.

However, the judge recalled that Google can only transmit data actually provided by users, and still present in its systems, in accordance with the retention period imposed by the aforementioned texts.

This order recalls that, even in the absence of a judicial investigation, a victim can act in summary proceedings to identify the perpetrator of anonymous blackmail. The judge here considered that the alleged facts, blackmail and harassment accompanied by threats of publishing sensitive content, fall under serious delinquency, a necessary condition to justify the lifting of IP addresses.

Talk to a lawyer

Facing a campaign of fake reviews?

Our lawyers audit the disputed reviews, preserve the evidence and handle the removal and compensation proceedings. Every enquiry is answered within 24 hours.

Contact our lawyers
05

What to remember if you are targeted by an anonymous author?

In many similar cases (identity theft, revenge porn, defamatory statements, etc.), victims face the difficulty of identifying the perpetrator.

This order confirms that the law today offers effective legal tools to restore balance.

For practitioners, it emphasizes the importance of accurately targeting the legal grounds, providing detailed evidence, and relying on proper procedures.

It should be noted that the communication request could have been made through the accelerated fundamental procedure provided for in Article 6-3 of the LCEN law \\ [2\")\\] which also allows for requesting measures to stop the harm (deletion of publications, accounts, etc.).

How to obtain the identity of an anonymous sender

  1. 01Preserve the messages and their headers

    Save the emails received with their full technical headers, screenshots of the calls and any contextual evidence: these exhibits establish the legitimate reason the judge requires.

  2. 02Characterise the offences

    Identify the applicable offences, blackmail, harassment, threats, invasion of privacy: the serious-crime threshold governs access to IP addresses.

  3. 03Bring urgent proceedings against the platform

    Serve the provider's entities before the president of the judicial court under Article 145 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

  4. 04Obtain an order for disclosure

    Secure the surname and first name, postal and email addresses, phone numbers, IP addresses used to create the accounts and connection timestamps, without prior notice to the account holder.

  5. 05Use the data obtained

    Trace the subscriber through the operator, then file a criminal complaint or bring civil proceedings for compensation and for the conduct to stop.

Deadlines to remember

15 working days

Deadline imposed on Google to disclose the data

1 year

Retention of IP addresses from the connection

5 years

Maximum sentence for blackmail (Article 312-10 of the Criminal Code)

24 h

INFLUXIO response time to any enquiry

Our lawyers bring these identification proceedings for victims of blackmail, harassment and online threats, then run the criminal and compensation claims against the person identified. See also our cyberbullying lawyer and e-reputation lawyer pages. Contact the firm: we answer every enquiry within 24 hours.

Frequently asked questions.

Yes, by court order. The urgent-applications judge can order the email provider to disclose the identification data attached to the account: declared name, associated addresses, phone number, IP addresses used at creation and connection timestamps. The platform only discloses data actually provided and still retained, which makes prompt action essential.

No. The order of 27 October 2025 confirms that a victim can bring civil urgent proceedings without any judicial investigation having been opened. It is enough to show a legitimate reason, namely evidence making the alleged facts credible and a potential claim that is not manifestly bound to fail. A criminal complaint remains useful, but it is not a precondition.

IP addresses are disclosed only to combat serious crime. Blackmail, harassment coupled with threats to publish sensitive content, aggravated invasion of privacy or identity theft satisfy that test in practice. A simple insult or an isolated defamatory statement does not, which then limits identification to declared data.

Not where the judge expressly says otherwise. In the order under review, the platform was prohibited from informing the account holders of the identification request, to prevent the destruction of evidence and any escalation. That safeguard must be sought in the originating application.

That is the most common situation for an account created solely to cause harm. The value of the application then lies in the technical data: the IP address used to create the account and the connection IP addresses. They allow the subscriber's identity to be obtained from the electronic communications operator, subject to the one-year retention period.

The urgent hearing usually takes place within a few weeks, and the decision sets a compliance deadline for the platform, fifteen working days in the case under review. Identifying the subscriber through the operator then adds several weeks. The whole timetable depends on the retention period, which is why action should be taken from the first messages.

Raphaël Molina

About the author

Raphaël Molina

Partner

Admitted to the Paris Bar, Maître Raphaël MOLINA is a co-founding partner of INFLUXIO and has specialized in intellectual property law and digital law for several years.

Contact

Contact INFLUXIO.

Would you like to schedule a meeting or get a quote?

We respond within 24 hours.