(Thanks to Paul Levy via Dave Farber for bringing this to my attention)
In summary:
Justice Jack Carter issued an opinion in Essent v. Doe that supports plaintiffs should not gain access to the identifying information of anonymous "speakers" (think bloggers) for whom the plaintiff wants to sue for damages without providing "sufficient evidence" that the plaintiff could win at trial. The support for this opinion is based on the right to freedom of speech as provided by the First Amendment.
This stems from a case involving the Paris Regional Medical Center (PRMC), where an anonymous blogger (we assume one) posted detailed information of problems at the hospital. (See
The-Paris-Site) The operator of PRMC claimed defamation as well as disclosure of patient-related information and attempted to discover the identity of the blogger through various means.
Though the court prevented the revelation of the identity at this time, the court has provided the operator with time to submit their argument of sufficient evidence. Stay tuned.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment