Judge Rules Web Commenter Will Be Unmasked To Mom 404
LegalReader writes "An Illinois judge has decided that an anonymous commenter on a newspaper website will be unmasked, even though the mother of a teen about whom 'Hipcheck16' allegedly made 'deeply disturbing' comments hasn't yet decided whether to sue over the posting."
Hip Check (Score:2, Informative)
For what it's worth, "hip check" is a roller derby term.
Re:Hip Check (Score:4, Informative)
It's a hockey term, actually. I imagine roller derby appropriated it because it's basically the same kind of hit. In hockey, though, you can get much better arc on your opponent if you catch them just right.
Re:When will some people learn... (Score:5, Informative)
... that theres really no such thing as anonymity online. If someone wants to find out who you are then eventually they will.
I could...
It's all in the details... (Score:2, Informative)
In this case, TFA doesn't get into the specific nature of the comments made; I see that some enterprising commenters have found additional details, but we still don't have the fullest possible context to this story. There could be additional comments that were libelous, or simply hateful and abusive. In the US (your jurisdiction may vary) there is a certain additional protection in these situations afforded to persons who are not public figures. (In other words, if the article or story being commented on was ABOUT the teen in question, the level of protection is lesser; on the other hand, if the teen in question was not the subject of the piece, then the level of protection granted is somewhat greater.)
In short, the internet is not, nor should it be, an open-ended platform to abuse people for no reason other than a desire to abuse. By the same token, where there is a clear public interest in commentary concerning public figures that may or may not be deemed "abusive" to the supporters of those figures, the protections for anonymous commenters should be protected to the fullest extent of the law.
All that said, if the nature of the comments could be boiled down to "Hey don't attack my mom" followed by "you're an idiot", then if I were the judge, I'd have to err on the side of protecting free speech and privacy rights. If we have the full context here, this is not a question that deserves to have a federal case made of it.
Re:The judge seems to be entirely right (Score:3, Informative)
This is surely the correct decision. In order to decide whether to sue, the mother needs to know who she might be suing.
No, she doesn't. You file against John Doe and then enter a process to discover the name.
If the poster is autistic, disturbed or perhaps already in the court system for other offenses, the mother might decide to leave well alone. If the only way that she can obtain the identity is to file a suit, then there is no escape from legal proceedings.
No, there is an escape - you drop the case. It's not hard. You file a motion to dismiss, the defense agrees, laywers get their fees, everyone goes home.
PS - Nice way to slam sufferers of autism.
Re:If he did, he would be wrong (Score:4, Informative)
If you make prank phone calls (even blocking caller ID), the phone company can be made to hand over your phone number & details
I don't think this should be the norm (you can't normally get somebody phoning you named), but i don't see why the internet should be any different.
or to meme it up for you:
Libellous comment is libellous
Threatening comment is threatening
Harassing comment is harassing
Re:Why do we care? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Who said you'll be found out via the net? (Score:3, Informative)
Great post, IndustrialComplex. To expand on that, using a home made cantenna I can access someones WiFi from a block or more away. Using a LiveCD or just doing a low level format I can hide any trace of connecting to someones WiFi. I don't even need to leave my house. What are the police going to do, kick down every door looking for someone who made anonymous comments? Get real.
Even if they were for any reason to get access to my house and find a pringles can, some coaxial cable and a few BNC connectors, what are they going to do? Arrest me? I'm some geek who enjoys pringles and I'm a certified to install fiber optic and copper cable.
Re:The judge seems to be entirely right (Score:5, Informative)
This is the "end" of a chain of lawsuits. The court has already ordered the newspaper to release the guy's IP address, and they did. The court has already ordered Comcast to release the identity of the guy who was using that IP address and they did.
So the court knows who the guy is and the guy is represented by a lawyer. She can go ahead and sue 'John Doe' based on the information the court already possesses if she really thinks she has a case. There is really no reason for the mother to know the guys identity other than to personally harrass him (presumably as this was a debate over a local election the guy lives in her district).
Think of the Children (Score:5, Informative)
So the deeply disturbing comments appear to be a teasing double-entendre. That Hipcheck16 may get sued over as the boy has a recently elected parent whom will get kudos for Thinking of the children.
My virgin ears (eyes?) I'm forever scarred.
Re:Maybe the 15 year old is a momma's boy (Score:2, Informative)
...Generally when dogs like that "cross the border from one persons property to the next"....
they are simply shot dead. That is what many property owners do around here to stray dogs. Anybody that allows their darling pet to run around free, without supervision, doesn't really love that dog and deserves to have it shot. No law is needed nor is the Sheriff's time wasted.
Re:Maybe the 15 year old is a momma's boy (Score:3, Informative)
The crust of most dog breads are a bit too ruff for me; I prefer beagles and cream cheese.
TFA sucks (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.citmedialaw.org/blog/2009/hipcheck16-no-turk-182-anonymous-political-speech-sacred [citmedialaw.org]
is much better -- it's written by actual legal scholars and discusses what the specific "deeply disturbing" comments were. Sometimes the hometown major newspaper isn't actually the best place to get articles, Slashdot.
p
Re:If he did, he would be wrong (Score:3, Informative)
civil action isn't an official consequence.
Re:The judge seems to be entirely right (Score:2, Informative)
[citation needed] Heh, heh... that's cute. But seriously, look at what Wilson did to WWI protesters using the Sedition Act for a documented example.