“A Vogue cover girl has won a precedent-setting court battle to unmask an anonymous blogger who called her a ‘skank’ on the internet.” - Anthony Citrano from Bookmarklet

Is this all part of the "hope" and "change" we were promised? Nice to know our liberties are safe now. >.> - pitlord

Nope, it just means the end of baseless shit talk, which is IMO a good thing. The less trolling, the better - LANjackal

There's nothing hopeful about the cheap, anonymous slander leveled by some anonymous coward. - Chris Baskind

@pit: uhhh yeah it's definitely connected. *eyeroll* - Anthony Citrano

I bet the blogger gets grounded for two weeks without tv. - Andrew Smith

What is quite bothersome to me is that Google doesn't seem willing to take this any further. - Anthony Citrano

I don't see a problem with this. It's not a conviction, they're just giving the woman a chance to sue the guy. I doubt he will be convicted. - Alejandro

@Alejandro: I do. Because then WTF does Google mean when they say you can leave a comment anonymously? It's anonymous until someone asks them who you are? - Anthony Citrano

I fully agree with her, if someone were to label me a WHORE I would have to defend myself because for a woman that is a very offensive word, one that damages families, careers and credibility. Slander and libel is not tolerated by me and I will see you in hell. Keep in mind that in other parts of the world, just the suspicion that a woman is a WHORE means DEATH, where a male member can kill a female member of the family to keep his honor and family name honorable. These words Skank, Whore, Bitch and Hoe do hurt and it sends a nasty negative message to society that women are Whores, Skanks, Bitches and Hoes. It also helps to add to the rise in crimes against women. No wonder so many women have low self esteem. I fully agree with her to expose this coward who lacks the courage to show his face when he says what he says. Who the hell does he think he is? - Jeunelle Foster

@Jeunelle: there is no conviction, nor is there any crime. - Anthony Citrano

Yes I understand that but I am addressing why she felt the need to expose this creep but while I'm here let me edit a word or two - Jeunelle Foster

@Jeunelle: so, in your view, a personal affront to a woman is more than enough to dispose of online anonymity? First of all, the basis would be libel, not slander - and it's not libel if it's true, and good luck determining *that* in a court of law. It's on par with trying to define "ugly" or "mean".... this is idiotic and I hope Google continues the fight. - Anthony Citrano

And who gets to determine if she is a whore/skank or not? Who gets to throw the first stone? Many years ago in Europe if a man was insulted he could challenge the other man to a dual, which in many cases resulted in death. The laws can always be changed. - Jeunelle Foster

See also, this: http://friendfeed.com/acitran... - Anthony Citrano

Anonymity???? What is that really except a person who hides while doing great damage in the community. We have a few over at BlogCatalog. They insist of giving everyone advice nobody asks for but I only listen to the advice of those who are credible and don't hide their Ip addresses, Whois info and any info that comes up on them in a Google search while hiding behind fake avatars and continuing to harass, stalk, insult and discredit those around them. Sorry I'm not buying it. Anonymity harbors trolls, cyberbullies, stalkers, harassers and crime. In fact anybody who claims to know me but I don't know them I have a problem with. - Jeunelle Foster

anonymity, or rather the right to pseudonym is a basic human right - falls under the category of privacy. Without it you can kiss goodbye to the capability for good people to "whistle blow" the bad actions of a government or company. As Anthony has already mentioned, if it's the case of suing for libel, then the courts can already request info from the company for details. BUT there has to be a sound case for it. Also, how do you know this blogger is a he? Could just as easily be a she. - alphaxion

I think there has to be some balance. On the one hand, there must be some recourse against people who make baseless accusations. On the other hand, you really can't go through life striking back against everyone who merely says something bad about you in a public forum - LANjackal from IM

I doubt Liskula wakes up everyday and says "hmmm let's see who can I sue today?". Yes the harasser could be a woman or a male but my third eye already shown me a picture of him (just kidding) - Jeunelle Foster

and that speaks volumes to me, btw just to let you know that the majority of insults I get based on how I look, come from females. You might want some glasses for that third eye. ;) - alphaxion

Roflmao...I never said that women don't insult and I'll have you know that the few who I'm speaking of at BlogCatalog "Are Women" so there. Nah, Nah, Nah, Nah....NO I don't discriminate, male or female they need to stop their petty bullshit and stop dragging it through the communities. - Jeunelle Foster

Just checked pitlord's profile out of curiosity. Very interesting, tastes like astroturf. - Mr. Gunn

The article is vague on some critical details. Google may or may not know the actual identity of the commenter, but likely has at least an IP address (which would then need court support to get a subscriber from an ISP, which then may or may not narrow down the actual commenter). Google is following a valid court order, the court seems to be the main one lowering the bar here. - LogEx

@Jeunelle: skankness and whoreness is in the eye of the beholder. Like kindness and ugliness, it is non-codifiable, as I already said above. As for anonymity and "what it is", read my article on the subject: http://www.cosmictap.com/scobles.... You may be of the same mind as Scoble on it, which is fine, but that view strikes me as both authoritarian and intellectually weak. - Anthony Citrano

That's you're opinion but be careful Anthony, I don't claim to know much of anything yet I could very well be the smartest one here :) - Jeunelle Foster

Here, I said this on another post - Google does protect libelous bloggers to a degree other blog hosts don't. They require a court order to name the blogger and a successful libel case before they will remove the blog. - Andrizzle Gizzle

Specifically I am thinking of a blog that writes 3-4 libelous posts a day. This blogger started on wordpress but was quickly shut down. Twitter has closed their account several times. Blogger/Google does nothing. - Andrizzle Gizzle

The judge in this case is a Justice in the Supreme Court, Civil Branch, New York County, which is part of the NY state court system. Certainly, defenses and appeals may arise before any information makes it to the public. - LogEx

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news... She forgives her, but "she has not ruled out suing the blogger for defamation for allegedly damaging her reputation and her livelihood." She apparently doesn't understand the meaning of the word 'forgive' - LogEx

Here's where the court went wrong: “The court also rejects the Anonymous Blogger’s argument that this court should find as a matter of law that Internet blogs serve as a modern day forum for conveying personal opinions, including invective and ranting, and that the statements in this action when considered in context, cannot be reasonably understood as factual assertions.” - LogEx

agreed, LE. Most courts still don't get this intertubes thing. #seriesoftubes - Anthony Citrano