Internet anonymity challenged ?

[Barman58]

Woman sues to have name of anonymous web poster revealed

A woman sues a daily newspaper for an anonymous comment made in the discussion forum. She also wanted the name of the anonymous commenter exposed. What happens with this case and others like it could shape the future of online forums.

Full Story ....

Woman sues to have name of anonymous web poster revealed | View from the Cubicle | TechRepublic.com

 

[Dark Nova Gamer]

Posting anonymously is everyone's right, if she wins then, the online identity of everyone isn't safe.

Is it me or is everyone sue happy?

 

[DarkXeno]

LOL, I love these cases where someone goes nuts because of something said on the internet. These are also the same type of people that think they are the greatest thing to the human race. If its said on the internet you shouldn't take anything personally just laugh and move on. Now with that being said the anonymous person who said the info had to be a part of the original conflict and why the lady got booted from the mall, so if that person doesnt have the guts to say who they are then the lady should've just walked away from the whole thing now she had to run and get a lawyer which mean instead of this whole thing being a 60 word note on the side of some web paper its now front line news on every site showing the world how shallow she is by hear attuide and what she was wearing on the day of the problem.
Way to go lady showing the world how stupid you are by running to a lawyer and not letting things go.

 

[holo88]

If someone said they were going to sue me, i'd take my shoe off, beat the hell out of them with it, and then leave it there, because thats about all they're going to get (my shoes).

<-- travels lite, for a reason.

also. isnt that what the internet is for? annoyance slander, drink recopies, and porn?

 

[Lordbob75]

This case amuses me.

Its really funny, because it is so pointless. Though the part mentioned at the end of the article is valid:

Here’s the line that is straddled: We have the right to free speech in the U.S., but what responsibility does the “host” of such free speech bear when it becomes illegal? If a business owner can be held accountable in a sexual harrassment lawsuit filed because of the actions of one of his employees, then does a web site have to be held to the same accountability for postings to its web site?

Yeah, its free speech. IMO, the website CANNOT be blamed or held responsible for what is posted in their comment boxes. HOWEVER, they SHOULD remove any offensive postings AS DETERMINED BY THEM.

~Lordbob

 

[smarteyeball]

Oh noes! Bad things on the Internets?

Punishment for all!

Why can't she do what the rest of the populous do when confronted by an anon comment? Troll back, anonymously

 

[Lordbob75]

Oh noes! Bad things on the Internets?

Punishment for all!

Why can't she do what the rest of the populous do when confronted by an anon comment? Troll back, anonymously

LOL smarty.
But then we would get sued for saying mean things about stupid people!


~Lordbob

 

[Barman58]

The interesting aspect of this case for me is not the actual frivolous defamation suit itself but the background information coming to light because of it.

In May, Missouri newspaper the Alton Telegraph was ordered to provide authorities with the names of two people who commented online about an ongoing murder investigation. (In that case, the judge rejected the Shield law defense, saying it did not extend to sources used by online bloggers.)

This type of anonymous comment is protected when made through the traditional media of the newspaper but not if released via the internet. This needs to be addressed with the way that the online blog and news media is taking over the role of older formats.

In the past many important news stories have broken only because the source was protected and so the law needs to be extended to include current methods of publication.

As for the actual defamatory statement, if this sort of un-substantiated comment was made here it would be removed, so I believe the publisher does have a duty to monitor what is said and to only allow those things that can be proved by the source,

If things are clearly stated as a rumor then that may be acceptable, dependent on the actual content.

Just MHO of course

 

[Mercurial]

do I get sued for flirting on the net too? =O

 

[Uber Philf]

hahaha, gosh id be a poor hobo in a gutter in south sydney by now if i got sued for every time ive flirted on the internet., then again, id be laughing my head off, before being hit by a tram :/

 

[Orbital Shark]

Oh dear, looks like i was right in choosing a username that connected me to my postal address :shock:

 

[Uber Philf]

Oh dear, looks like i was right in choosing a username that connected me to my postal address :shock:

:roflmao:

 

[weh]

Posting anonymously is everyone's right, if she wins then, the online identity of everyone isn't safe.

Is it me or is everyone sue happy?

While everyone may or may not be happy to file frivolous law suits, that's beside the point.

Anonymity is not right. It is a byproduct of new technology. And, when abused, it SHOULD be subject to forfeiture.

Case in point, no one has the right to defame someone, regardless of their ability to do it anonymously.

From the story, it appears that the woman DID purchase the dress at question from the mall from which she was evicted. That's lame, but I can see it happening.

However, an anonymous poster has claimed that the reason for eviction was that the woman exposed herself to another woman and children. If that's true, then the woman in skimpy clothing could be prosecuted criminally for a simple misdemeanor or, even, a sex offense. Suddenly, something that seemed lame is quite serious.

And what if the anonymous poster is simply running off at the mouth? That IS defamation. The woman in skimpy clothing deserves her day in court. And the poster -- nor the newspaper -- should be able to hide behind internet anonymity. The poster should be held accountable for his/her words and the newspaper should be held accountable for researching its story and getting the facts straight.

On the other hand, if the newspaper can produce evidence that what the anonymous poster said was true, then the case should be thrown out.