Posted on 03/08/2014 7:18:35 AM PST by PaulCruz2016
PHILADELPHIA — A Philadelphia judge has ordered philly.com to reveal the name of an anonymous commenter, in a defamation suit brought by electricians’ union leader John Dougherty.
An attorney in the case says it could have a broad impact on incendiary online comments and those users, sometimes called “trolls,” who post them anonymously.
The anonymous defendant in the suit, disguised by the nonsense name “fbpdplt,” called Dougherty a name in the comments section of an article on the website, one of the properties in the media group that also owns the Philadelphia Inquirer and Daily News.
(Excerpt) Read more at philadelphia.cbslocal.com ...
I heard he kicks his dog!
Too bad this judge isn’t looking at Sen. Harry Reid whose public comments that all the people complaining about Obamacare are lying and that Mitt Romney never paid taxes.
Thin skinned.
As much as we loathe trolls, should this be done? A troll who does not authenticate himself or his message should be a troll that nobody pays attention to. It seems that creating a counter-troll ID and having it argue against the troll’s lies would be the most sensible answer, if practical.
” Sen. Harry Reid whose public comments”
He can say anything he wants to on the floor of the Senate, without fear of repercussion. That’s the way they have it set up.
For what it’s worth: the troll apparently called Dougherty a “pedophile”, which seems like a little bit more than a “name”, as the article describes it.
You may silence us, but it will not change our minds.
When a person signs up to a website they can use any false name they want that is not their real name and they can use a throw-away email that was also signed up under a false name.
So the website can say under court order that the name that was used at signup is “Barack O’Blahblah” who lives at “1600 Cesspool Lane”. What good is that going to do the plaintiff?
If the plaintiff tries to shut down the website for slander, that will be difficult as the website can counter that their first amendment rights have been violated.
The union thug could have the website operators stalked and threatened and that could cause website to ban the offensive poster. But that would be coercion and union thugs never use coercion do they?
Jim, IIRC there were issues with an FR troll called Eschoir in the distant past. I don’t think this is a similar case is it? You tried to get Eschoir to leave, banning him, but he kept popping up under different guises and you finally sued. They never tried to get this persona to leave AFAIK.
They get the IP address and use it to identify the person responsible. Even behind a proxy, they can still track you down. See: Kernell, David.
“I heard he kicks his dog!”
He probably only kicks his neighbor’s dog.
Troll? I have people calling me a troll on golf forum just because I might not be a fan of his/her favorite player, or they disagree with my opinion etc
I have been called a troll here even couple times over the years, for basically the same reason.
Recently on a so called “Christian” forum I was called a troll because I challenged them on their pro gay, pro abortion stance
Just saying.
Some of the anti Palin folks here will sling the troll comment around
The way it’s broadened today, it could mean the person has lewd thoughts about children and might never have molested or intended to molest anyone. Still that is kind of below the belt.
And yet...
On FR there are some regular freepers who make ugly and lewd comments about politicians. I don’t think they should do that without pretty good proof, and sometimes I tell them off for it, but I wouldn’t think that should get them sued. Also when it’s a public figure being panned like that, speculation is better protected by law than if it’s a private figure.
Yes, people ought to be careful, and God cares about careless accusations. But how far should the law go? It used to be accepted that God was the ultimate moral policeman (if we look at it on that level). Those who blasphemed without cause would bring about their own hardships, while those who were thus blasphemed would be vindicated. But in a society that lets the devil dominate it, the rules seem to be inverted. The wicked prosper, the conscientious suffer. And the temptation to step in with a manmade solution grows.
A full grown man so sensitive, so easily offended, one of first rhymes I learned that was of a practical use, was Sticks and Stones...
What can you say when men in leadership positions such as McCain is so easily offended, a real example he is...not!
If you made a provacative, argumentative statement, then you’re a troll to someone.
What if you were using a public Wi-Fi connection, (like the free Wi-Fi at coffee shops and malls) or your neighbors unsecured Wi-Fi connection?
“What good is that going to do the plaintiff?”
You can call yourself anything, but the ISP has your address, 186.111.222.123. How many times have you gone to a website in Timbucktu and seen advertisements from your local Sears? That’s because the ISP knows exactly where 186.111.222.123 is, right down to your street address.
Better a common ‘tater than a dict ‘tater.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.