By Jacqui Cheng  | Last updated February 11, 2009 11:45

The right to flame someone online has typically been protected by the
courts, but a Texas judge has decided enough is enough when it comes to 178
anonymous commenters on Topix.com. The site has less than a month to hand
over identifying information about the Internet trolls.

A Texas judge has ordered an online news site to unveil identifying details
about 178 anonymous commenters on the site. The order came after a couple,
Mark and Rhonda Lesher, sued the numerous anonymous commenters posting to
Topix.com for making what they considered to be "perverted, sick, vile,
inhumane accusations" about them.

The Leshers were originally thrust into the Texas spotlight in 2008 after
being accused of sexually assaulting an unidentified former client of Mark
Lesher. That's when thousands of comments began piling up on the community
news aggregator Topix to discuss the sexual assault charges. As with most
things on the Internet, many Topix users felt free to let loose with nasty
comments about the Leshers.

The Leshers were found not guilty of the charges after a criminal trial.
That, however, wasn't the end of the 70-some individual threads posted to
Topix about them. "It just... basically made us both feel like common
criminals," the Leshers told the Dallas Morning News (via TechDirt). "It's
like someone had basically raped us of our reputation and our standing in
the community over and over and over again."

That's when the Leshers chose to sue a number of Topix's anonymous
commenters (but, interestingly, not Topix itself). The law firm representing
the couple, Connor & Demond PLLC in Austin, told Computerworld that the
lawsuit was limited specifically to the posters whose statements were
considered defamatory under Texas law.

The complaint filed by the Leshers details many of the comments made by the
anonymous defendants. Some are certainly lower blows than others—insinuating
that Mark drugs women and that Rhonda is the "Herpies Queen," and that the
couple may have AIDS, among other things—but not all of the comments are as
bad. Some merely accuse the Leshers of being liars, and others even say to
wait for confirmation of some of the accusations.

Regardless of what we think of the comments, however, a Tarrant County judge
clearly felt that they were libelous enough to order Topix to cough up
personal information on the anonymous posters. The problem is that this
order seems to ignore a number of previous rulings protecting the anonymity
of Internet commenters, no matter how trollish.

In 2005, the Delaware Supreme Court ruled that an anonymous blogger could
remain anonymous after being sued by a local councilman and his wife. The
blog in question had questioned the councilman's sexual proclivities, among
other things, which the couple considered defamatory. A lower court granted
the request to identify the blogger, but the Daleware Supreme Court
overturned the decision. Then, in January of 2008, two female law students
who were the target of vicious online attacks admitted that they had been
unsuccessful in digging up personal information about a handful of anonymous
posters, and had so far hit a dead end when it came to getting a court
order.

One month later, a California appeals court reversed a previous decision
that would have allowed Lisa Krinsky, COO of a Florida-based drug service
company, to subpoena 10 anonymous Yahoo message board posters' real names.
The court said that the commenters were allowed to exercise their First
Amendment rights and speak their minds, even though some of the comments
were quite scathing and potentially libelous.

Topix, for its part, appears to be doing its best to ensure that it only
hands over exactly what is required, and not a bit more. Topix CEO Chris
Tolles told Computerworld that the company takes privacy very seriously, and
that the company would not "simply hand over all of our records" without
reviewing the subpoena in detail. "We prefer to make sure requests are clear
and specific and not overly broad," he said. According to the order, Topix
has until March 6 to give up the information.

Reply via email to