Reposted From London Free Press – 2009/08/26

http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/News/CanadaWorld/2009/08/26/10613866-sun.html

(They are horrible at archiving, so I have reposted it rather than just linking it)

Trash-talking bloggers warned of perils

Wed, August 26, 2009

A court battle to ID a name caller is cited as a wake-up call

By THE CANADIAN PRESS

MONTREAL — Anonymous bloggers who like to trash talk online should brush up on the latest cyber etiquette, say legal experts.

The recent case of a Canadian model who won a court battle to reveal the identity of a nasty name-calling blogger should be a wake-up call about the legal implications of sharing derogatory opinions online, said lawyer David Fewer of the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic.

“It should be an eye opener for most people,” Fewer said yesterday. “They are not nearly as anonymous on the Internet as they think they are.”

Liskula Cohen, a former model for Vogue and Flare magazines, won a court order in New York that forced Google to unmask the identity of a blogger, who had called her a “skank” and made other off-colour comments about her online.

Cohen has since dropped a multimillion lawsuit against the blogger, saying it wouldn’t add anything to her life. Meanwhile, the blogger, Rosemary Port, is suing Google for violating her privacy by revealing her name.

Fewer said Canadian courts, as well as courts in many other jurisdictions, will likely give people the opportunity to launch similar court battles to reveal the secret identity of an online persona or the person behind an online publication.

“If you’ve got a non-frivolous legal claim you are entitled to your day in court,” said Fewer, acting director of the clinic, based at the University of Ottawa.

Cohen’s lawyer, Steve Wagner, said the case has struck a chord with people and he expects to see more of them end up in court. “It goes well beyond just trash talking.

Now, as you can see, she gave up this nonsense AFTER exposing the author. I guess that is some sort of victory. I am not exactly sure how I feel about this. I have no problem giving my name to anyone who wants it … but that isn’t really why I reposted this. I think what struck me is that apparently the person making the accusation that the model is a skank (among other things – I have no idea who she is) was identified, but there were no court proceedings that made the model prove she was not a skank. I mean, I know it is all point-of-view, but “unmasking” someone because of slander, but not PROVING there was slander? Is it because the person was a model? I have a problem with people who choose to be in the public eye complaining that they are in the public eye.

Of course, this is just my humble opinion.