Wednesday, September 17, 2014
Search
  
Most Popular
Tech Views
General Computing
WEB Reviews
Seagate Enterprise Capacity 3.5 V.3 4TB SAS 6Gb/s HDD Review
OCZ Vector 256GB SSD Review @ Custom PC Review
Gigabyte F2A85XM-D3H
NZXT Phantom 630
Auvio Bluetooth Portable Speaker Review
Corsair H90 CPU Cooler Review
BIOSTAR Hi-Fi Z77X (Intel Z77) Motherboard Review
Noctua NH-L9i Cooler Review on Technic3D
Breaking News
Sony To Offer Unity For PlayStation To PlayStation Licensed Developers
Blackberry Introduces Elegant Porsche Design P9983 Smartphone
Club 3D Launches 4K Docking Station
Logitech Gives You Control of Your Smart Home with the New Harmony Living Home Lineup
New iPads And OS X Yosemite Announcements Expected Next Month
Opera Max Data-savings App to be Embedded into MediaTek's LTE SoCs
Nero 2015 Supports Burning via Smartphone, WiFi Streaming
PMC Delivers 16-port SAS and SATA Storage Controllers
Home > Tech Views > General Computing

Monday, July 11, 2005
Plaintiff Anonymous

1. Page 1

Companies all over the world have problems with the Internet. It provides freedom of expression together with anonymity, a fact allowing everyone to shoot against the just and the unjust alike without being punished. The companies’ problem is focused on the publicity any litigation on their behalf, be it either fair or unfair, aimed against anyone who would use abusive remarks on them would gain, resulting thus in a course of events contrary to the ones sought for.

The novelty of a trial, brought to the Virginia Supreme Court, lay in the fact that the libel action against an anonymous user was lodged by a group of…anonymous plaintiffs. The company appeared in Court under the “Incorporated Listed Company” alias, demanding rogatory commission to unveil the identity of five anonymous users, who were alleged to belong to the staff it employed.

However the Court refused to intervene in favour of the company on the grounds of the plaintiffs’ inability to present sufficient reasons justifying the “secrecy of their identity.” “In this case,” the judge proclaimed, “the one and only justifiable reason for the plaintiffs remaining anonymous is none other than fear for financial prejudice. Even though financial prejudice ranks amongst the causes needed to be taken under serious consideration, the anonymous plaintiff has not been in the position of providing the Court with sufficient proof to substantiate the specific circumstances under which his anonymity is deemed justified.”

The activists supporting freedom for the electronic press greeted the aforesaid magisterial decision with the satisfaction due to the freedom of anonymous speech on the Internet. Until today, dozens of lawsuits have been brought to court against anonymous Internet users, having mixed results. Yet, the one presented in this article was the first in which the accusers themselves were anonymous. “If one wishes to bring their cases to courts financed by the taxpayers’ money and would like to possess legal rights that would affect some people’s lives,” attorney Mr. Meagan E. Gray who defends anonymity in the Internet has stated, “then they will have to do it openly in court, so that they are liable to any check by the Press that would make Citizens aware of what is going on…”

 

By Pashos Mandravelis.

email to P. Mandravelis




Get RSS feed Easy Print E-Mail this Message


 
Home | News | All News | Reviews | Articles | Guides | Download | Expert Area | Forum | Site Info
Site best viewed at 1024x768+ - CDRINFO.COM 1998-2014 - All rights reserved -
Privacy policy - Contact Us .