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.
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.
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!
Better a common ‘tater than a dict ‘tater.
I think this carries a useful lesson for those on FR. It’s okay to call Obama an anti-American, antisemitic, drug-addled communist. Besides flattering him, those statements would be true. However, we can’t slander him as a pedophile, both because we could lose our anonymity and because it’s unfair - we all know Obama has no interest in girls/women of any age, and that he prefers older men, not underage boys.
That way, those who do not scream the Party Line from the rooftops can be "dealt with", in one fashion or another.
It is always a good idea to review what you are posting and ask yourself “Would I post that if I had to put my real name to it?” Unless you are very clever and go to a great deal of trouble you identity is within easy reach of any seriously interested party. Always keep that in mind when communicating via modern communication devices. You are not anonymous and your message will be recorded.
Knowing the recent history of certain union thugs, I have no doubt these bastards would like to know where this poster lives so they can give him a beating or kill him.
Unions have a sordid history of thuggery with respect to any opposition. The opposition in this case is that the poster "called him a name". Really? That's it? I have a suspicion there is something deeper going on here. Perhaps the poster said something that shows he has deeper knowledge of some malfeasance on the part of the union, and the union would like to know where he lives, so they can "talk" to him.
You know, back about 200 years ago, when this country had actual freedom and rights, there was a whole cottage industry printing anonymous pamphleteers; the most famous being Thomas Paine's Common Sense. Of course nowadays, those elitists in power don't want to relinquish that power, and will use any means necessary to quash dissent.
I'm sure if they could, the elitists would like the internet to have never been invented. Come to think of it, I'm sure the Monarchies of Europe at the time wish the printing press had never been invented. Throughout time, groundbreaking inventions have been trying to set men free, and those in power have always tried to keep men in chains.
I’m right here, ol’ judge ol’ bubbela!
This one is easy. Websites can simply refrain from requesting the real names of their members for commenting on forums. Then it would go down to investigating from the ISP to the websites, and finding out who the subscriber of the internet connection is from where the comment originated, but that can’t be sufficient for naming someone to sue in court for slander, ect.
I can’t imagine a plaintiff reward based on someone making a comment using someone elses internet connection to do it, under current law anyway. This isn’t the same as illegally downloading copyrighted material where the internet subscriber is responsible. There would have to be more evidence, such as camera footage of someone using the workstation it came from at that specific time from the internet subscriber’s location. Then again, I’m no lawyer, and I DIDN’T stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.....
After reading the article, I agree with the judge.
Why do I think the union thug wants the poster’s name and address to go administer a gang-style beating, rather than to simply sue him?
I carry a throw away computer for trolling.
If this kind of thinking holds up, we’re going to need five million more lawyers and 500,000 more judges to handle all the defamation lawsuits.