Maine Court Hears Case On E-Mail Privacy

Rev Wally writes "A case before the Maine Supreme Court could change rules regarding an ISP revealing the owner of an e-mail address. It seems that some one (known in court documents only as John Doe) sent an e-mail of an unflattering cartoon of the plaintiff, Ronald Fitch, and his wife. Doe had registered for an e-mail address using Fitch's name. Doe's lawyer is arguing that the e-mail is protected as free speech, and the the ISP cannot be forced to divulge the names of subscribers except in a criminal case. Fitch is arguing that he may be a victem of identity theft."

Comments

Differing interpretations based on lack of facts

[AceCaseOR]

From reading comments on the article and the article itself, I've got the impression that we don't have all the facts. From where I see it, it breaks down like this

• If Doe registered the E-Mail address ronald.fitch@isp.net then it's not identity theft, he's just being a dick.
• If Doe altered his header information to have his name appear in E-Mail clients as "Ronald Fitch" rather than "John Doe" (aka "Pulling a Burke"), then he's just a dick, and it's not Identity Theft.
• If Doe registered for an E-Mail account at an ISP and, on the forms, said his name was Ronald Fitch, then at least he can be charged with fraud - by the ISP. Identity Theft charges are up to debate.
• If John Doe not only gave Ronald Fitch's name to the ISP as his name when he signed up, but also set up billing so that Fitch was billed (or would be called if Doe failed to pay), then that would count as both fraud and, most likely, identity theft.

So, is anyone from Maine, or even better, the community where this whole disturbance is taking place on Slashdot? If so, please enlighten us.