AOL Loses Privacy Appeal

robkill writes "The Virgina Supreme Court ruled against AOL in its appeal, on First Amendment grounds, to throw out a subpeona by Nam Tai Electronics seeking the identity of an anonymous AOL user who posted 'false and defamatory' messages on a message board. Details can be found in the News.com article."

Comments

Dunno if this is related

[Smidge204]

After looking around for more background info on this, I came across this year-old article about a similar case. To quote the article:

"
Using seven different aliases, Titzer posted 246 messages on Yahoo Internet message boards ... Nam Tai argued that at least three of Titzer's messages were false, defamatory and unlawful."

Even in that case, where (if?) the person was making a deliberate attempt to undermine the company using false information, I still see no reason why Yahoo, AOL, or any other middle-man company should be at all obligated to get involved. It reminds me of Napster - They only went after them so hard because it was the only target they had. I suppose some people just have to do something to justify themselves.

Now as much as I despise AOL, I hope they don't give in so easily. Privacy is an all-or-none type of issue. "We must remember the First Amendment which protects any shrill jackass no matter how self-seeking." -FG Withington

=Smidge=

Libel laws

[0x0d0a]

Nam Tai is within their legal rights to go after the person if (IANAL and this is not reading from a book, but it's somewhat close to the right requirements):

a) Factually incorrect information is knowingly or negliently posted by the person (public figures like politicians need to be shown to have knowingly done something, whereas your ordinary person or journalist only needs to be neglient).

b) That information causes material damages to the victim.

I do not think it is necessary for the person to intend to cause material damages to the victim.