Monday, March 30, 2009

Your identity!

Good Day Readers:
Found the article below on a site we regularly visit operated by law school students across Canada. It prompted us to reiterate our policy regarding your identity.
If you contact us as "Anonymous" your e-mail arrives as Anonymous[]. Therefore, we have no way of identifying you from your address.
Should, for example, we try to reach you seeking clarification on something you've said our electronic letter comes bouncing back as undeliverable.
The only way you can be identified is by your computer's unique IPS (Internet Service Provider) number which leaves an electronic trail whever you go. However, it has no meaning for us because it's simply a series of digits. Authorities would only be allowed to access this information under Court Order which would leave us no choice since refusing could mean being cited for contempt.

"The Hacker!

As you'll read shortly in the first of our series, "The Hacker!" Google in the United States with permission of the Blogger worked with a Canadian computer science engineer to identify who and where the culprit was located using ISPs. You'll be surprised.
Our policy has always been and shall remain, we reserve the right to all final editoral content. Inappropriate language and potentially defamatory material will either be removed or altered.
Clare L. Pieuk
By: Ryan MacIsaac
March 28, 2009
Following a trend of the erosion of privacy rights online, an Ontario couple who own a far-right website were ordered to disclose the names of eight anonymous posters related to a defamation lawsuit.
The owners of, Mark Fournier and Connie Wilkins-Fournier, were told that they would have to reveal the names of anonymous posters who attacked Ottawa anti-hate-speech activist Richard Warman. He is suing the couple, alleging that they “falsely and maliciously published and circulated” defamatory comments about him. The Fourniers argued against the disclosure saying that posters on their site behave differently under the shroud of anonymity than as if they were publicly identified.
Ontario Superior Court Judge Stanley Kershman decided that “the defendants are under an obligation to disclose all documents in their power and control.” He cited a case from 2004 in which it was stated that privacy rights must be balanced with the public interest and the rights of others. He also cited a more recent child pornography case in which the judge found that there was “no reasonable expectation of privacy” with respect to ISP disclosure of customer information (this case is discussed in detail at LawIsCool here).
U of O professor Michael Geist disagreed on his blog with the argument that the disclosure of the posters’ information was essential to protection of the public interest:
"Protection for anonymous postings is certainly not an absolute, but a high threshold that requires prima facie evidence supporting the plaintiff’s claim is critical to ensuring that a proper balance is struck between the rights of a plaintiff… and the privacy and free speech rights of the poster. … I fear that the high threshold seems to have been abandoned here."
So as the blogger wars heat up below, keep in mind while posting that you can’t always hide behind the anonymity of the Internet.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Will Goodon looks like that guy on Seinfeld who called Jerry a phony and later got his hands caught in the trunk.

6:31 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home