« Lego Wow | Main | Teddy »

August 26, 2009

Comments

bj

I disagree with Tim, i.e. this is "old news." In particular the "skank" case that brought the issue up, as well as the more disturbing previous version (the law school gossip site in which women law students -- i.e. private citizens -- were being harassed in violent and threatening ways) bring up significant issues. And, the issues have certainly not been resolved, and new facts (i.e. a law suit forcing blogger to reveal anonymous identities) certainly makes the topic newsworthy again.
The general legal consensus is that the revealed blogger (Port) doesn't have a case (against Blogspot). There's discomfort in the legal community, because it's also true that people think Cohen successfully exploited a version of a "SLAPP suit" (i.e. strategic lawsuit against public participation) in which a lawsuit is threatened to hamper speech that would otherwise be protected.

The case should make anonymous bloggers think a bit, 'cause, basically, it sets a fairly low threshold for breaking anonymity. A disinterested party -- Google, holds the information, and is in charge of defending the anonymity in the court, while the anonymous blogger is not in the case (by virtue of their anonymity) means that the courts can be used fairly effectively to squeeze out the information, as Cohen did, by appropriately lawyered-up people.

I think most legitimate anonymous bloggers realize that -- they see their anonymity as a way of masking to the general public/internet searches, but not legal anonymity. I suspect Google had better write a disclaimer stating what level of anonymity they're going to defend -- and I think it's going to be pretty low. If we need higher levels of anonymity (and, Chinese bloggers who would be jailed or killed if their identity was revealed comes to mind), we need to develop new services/new laws to protect them. Google gives those people up, too.

(I'm not sure why people think that Dowd's column isn't contributing to the debate)

bj

Libraries, on the other hand, will fight their best fight to protect your borrowing records (at least when the librarians are in charge)

PhilosopherP

It seems to me that Dowd is making a pretty good living writing -- my hubby is a darned good blogger who makes nothing writing -- with the paycheck comes some abuse. I know he'd take the abuse for her paycheck -- me, I'm not so sure.

Timothy Burke

There are certainly interesting things to be said about the case in question. But Dowd merely uses the case to make an utterly generic observation about online discourse (anonymous people sometimes use anonymity to say mean things), and from that, to a trite generic bashing of the whole Internet. I think if you want to take up a case that puts some new wrinkles on an old discussion, come into the discussion where the real points of contention are sharply drawn. Otherwise this is just more of the conventional rage of an increasingly disenfranchised New York-Washington chattering class at their inability to control or direct the public sphere as they once imagined they did.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    BlogHer

    &





    &&