Slander

[letmetellyou]

I read in another thread where someone warned someone against slandering them. Is it possible to be liable for any sort of slander when you are posting in an anonymous thread? I wouldn't think so, but am curious if anyone knows.

[Lurk]

Originally Posted by letmetellyou

I read in another thread where someone warned someone against slandering them. Is it possible to be liable for any sort of slander when you are posting in an anonymous thread? I wouldn't think so, but am curious if anyone knows.

In my opinion this has been discussed a lot. Based solely upon what I have read, people should make it clear in their posts that they are only expressing an opinion and not stating outright that someone's parentage includes an orangutan.

[withrespect (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Lurk

In my opinion this has been discussed a lot. Based solely upon what I have read, people should make it clear in their posts that they are only expressing an opinion and not stating outright that someone's parentage includes an orangutan.

... In my opinion, your opinion is accurate.... That is solely an opinion on your opinion of course.

[Lurk]

Originally Posted by withrespect

... In my opinion, your opinion is accurate.... That is solely an opinion on your opinion of course.

I believe, and this is solely a superficial observation, that I shall be pleased you are agreeing with me.

[slotpuppy]

Originally Posted by withrespect

... In my opinion, your opinion is accurate.... That is solely an opinion on your opinion of course.

We can agree to disagree.

[migtig]

Libel or slander?

Some courts have ruled that an individual, even as an anonymous poster, is liable for harrassing and bullying other anonymous posters.

Some courts have chosen not to hear those cases and tossed them.

Many courts have ruled that your real name, ip, and other identifiers have to be released to a court of law.



So consider, that there is a chance indeed that you can be sued and you are not truly anonymous.

However, it had better be a legit case, before considering such a suit. Many lawyers will laugh you out of their office and still charge you for wasting their time, if your mom was called a monkey's uncle, or whatever Lurk said.

[Tilted (Premo)]

I suspect it's possible, at least if the real life identity of the poster supposedly being defamed is known to some. And if we're talking about posted comments, it would be liable rather than slander.

This is a question I've been curious about and one that the law may still need to catch up with. Can an on line identity - one that is completely anonymous (i.e. no one can associate it with the real life person behind it) - suffer damages? If there are statutory damages (i.e. that don't require the demonstration of actual damages), that's one thing. But to the extent someone needs to demonstrate damages, can they do so based only on the reputation or value of an anonymous on line identity?

[migtig]

Originally Posted by Tilted

I suspect it's possible, at least if the real life identity of the poster supposedly being defamed is known to some. And if we're talking about posted comments, it would be liable rather than slander.

This is a question I've been curious about and one that the law may still need to catch up with. Can an on line identity - one that is completely anonymous (i.e. no one can associate it with the real life person behind it) - suffer damages? If there are statutory damages (i.e. that don't require the demonstration of actual damages), that's one thing. But to the extent someone needs to demonstrate damages, can they do so based only on the reputation or value of an anonymous on line identity?

There was a case (I don't remember all the details) in California a while back (a few years) where an "anonymous" blogger, meaning she never posted her real name, was threatened and harrassed by an "anonymous" same screen name each time commenter on her blog. She felt endangered, went to police, consulted a lawyer, went to court. She won her case.

However that case really got the ball rolling with the whole "you aren't really anonymous" thing.

[withrespect (Premo)]

Or you could just choose to not be anonymous and that should avoid any confusion.

[Tilted (Premo)]

Originally Posted by migtig

There was a case (I don't remember all the details) in California a while back (a few years) where an "anonymous" blogger, meaning she never posted her real name, was threatened and harrassed by an "anonymous" same screen name each time commenter on her blog. She felt endangered, went to police, consulted a lawyer, went to court. She won her case.

However that case really got the ball rolling with the whole "you aren't really anonymous" thing.

Maybe I'll look for that and see what the court said. But that situation seems a bit clearer to me - someone might feel threatened even if they're trying to remain anonymous, as they can't be sure the threatener can't figure out who they are.