John Doe No 1
p2pnet.net News:- An “Internet critic” aka John Doe No 1 who had the temerity to post less than flattering messages commenting on a Delaware politician’s leadership skills has a right to remain anonymous.
Or so says Public Citizen in a "friend of the court" brief lodged at the Supreme Court of Delaware today. Also in the brief are the American Civil Liberties Union, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the American Civil Liberties Union of Delaware.
John Doe No. 1 posted two messages on the Smyrna/Clayton Issues Blog in September 2004 suggesting Patrick Cahill, a member of the Smyrna Town Council, “had diminished leadership skills, energy and enthusiasm” and referred to Cahill’s "character flaws," "mental deterioration," and "failed leadership," says Public Citizen.
Cahill and his wife sued JD1 and three other anonymous critics, “claiming that John Doe No. 1 had accused Cahill of suffering from ‘mental defects and diseases,’ and that the misspelling of his name implied he was ‘engaging in extramarital, homosexual affairs’," says the organization.
But, "The blog postings at issue here contained standard criticism of a public official’s job performance – not defamatory statements – and it was well within John Doe No. 1’s right to make the comments," it adds.
Something you think we should know? tips[at]p2pnet.net
See:-
Public Citizen – Internet Critic of Delaware Politician Has Right to Anonymity, August 3, 2007
August 4th, 2005 at 10:18 am
This reminds me of the time back in 2001, when someone tried to sue an anonymous poster on Fuckedcompany.com.
It was hilarious, these guys (could have been SCO systems or Razorfish…) suing a random username.
What a waste of money. And thank god they upheld freedom of speech in this case.
August 4th, 2005 at 2:32 pm
This is just another reason why proxies are a good thing.
August 5th, 2005 at 11:33 am
Just wondering if you read all the post and what they say. I live here and it just not about the person’s political views. It really has nothing to do with that. Try looking a little harder at this story, there is a lot more to it then Frist Amendent here. You need to do a little more research.
August 22nd, 2005 at 6:27 pm
I agree. I read the case, and calling a local politican’s wife a prostitute and a whore are not what I would consider free speech. It is cowardly and these Does should be unmasked to face the music.