Good decision here in DC on Internet anonymity

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Paul Levy" <plevy () citizen org>
Date: February 10, 2009 6:20:22 PM EST
To: <dave () farber net>
Subject: Good decision here in DC on Internet anonymity

The federal court here in Washington DC has thrown out a subpoena  
seeking to identify anonymous Internet speakers in the case of  
Sinclair v. TubesockTed et al, in which a Minnesota man targeted three  
bloggers for attacking his YouTube video claiming to have had sex and  
done drugs with Barack Obama.  Of course Sinclair’s defamation claim  
is ludicrous and he could never have prevailed * just imagine the  
reaction of a DC jury!   But without the procedural and substantive  
protections that we have been crafting in courts across the country,  
Sinclair would have been able to identify his detractors and publicize  
their names to all of the crazies who have been posting on blogs in  
support of his attacks on Obama, thus subjecting them to a genuine  
possibility of retaliation.

The court ultimately dismissed the claim for lack of jurisdiction,  
because “Doe” defendants cannot be sued in federal courts using  
“diversity jurisdiction,” and because there was no basis for filing  
suit against them in DC (other than Sinclair’s desire to obtain press  
coverage for his claims about Obama).   But the opinion sparkles with  
good discussions that can be used in future cases of this sort.  Most  
important, the judge endorsed the importance of protecting anonymous  
speech online through standards like the one adopted in New Jersey in  
the Dendrite case and in Delaware in the Cahill case, requiring  
plaintiffs who want to identify anonymous detractors to make an  
evidentiary showing that their claim has some realistic prospect of  
success.  Thjis case is the first time that the issue has been  
addressed in DC,  The court also directly addressed Sinclair’s  
contention that he could compel me to reveal the name of my anonymous  
client, recognizing that the identity is protected by the attorney- 
client privilege (the first time this issue has been addressed in any  
Doe anonymity case).

A link to the decision appears at the end of the following note from  
our press office.

Paul Alan Levy
Public Citizen Litigation Group
1600 - 20th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20009
(202) 588-1000
http://www.citizen.org/litigation

> > > Joe Newman 2/10/2009 6:02 PM >>>


Public Citizen scored a victory today when a federal judge dismissed a  
defamation suit brought by Minnesota resident Lawrence Sinclair  
against three people who criticized him anonymously on the Internet.  
Public Citizen represents one of the three defendants and a blog that  
was subpoenaed to identify Public Citizen's client. The defamation suit
was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Last year, during the presidential primaries, Sinclair posted a  
YouTube video in which he made outrageous claims against Barack Obama,  
arising from a supposed encounter at a Chicago nightclub in 1999 with  
the then-Illinois state senator.

In dismissing the suit, Judge John D. Bates found Sinclair's case did  
not show enough merit to identify the anonymous critics, who had  
posted about Sinclair on DemocraticUnderground.com and Digg.com. Paul  
Levy, the Public Citizen attorney who handled the case, said: "The  
right to speak freely and openly on matters of public importance - and  
to choose to do so anonymously - is a cherished right in this country.  
Courts have consistently ruled that there must be a compelling reason  
to take away someone's right to speak out anonymously on the Web. This  
case was no exception."

For documents related to the case, go to 
http://www.citizen.org/litigation/briefs/IntFreeSpch/cases/articles.cfm?ID=14267#sinclair

Joe Newman
Press Officer / Public Citizen
1600 20th Street NW
Washington, DC 20009
(202) 588-7703
www.citizen.org

Check out our blog:
www.citizenvox.org

Follow us on Twitter:
http://twitter.com/Public_Citizen





-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com