Celine
18th October 2010, 18:40
For all those who think they are "free" to say what they want online...
Blogger John Baglow makes the case that Officer Bubbles — the Toronto cop who enfamed himself by confronting a young woman who was peacefully blowing bubbles during the G20 protests last spring — is in the process of doing himself even more damage.
The cop, Constable Adam Josephs, warned that if one bubble so much as touched him, the woman would be charged with assault. A video of the confrontation brought down tsunamis of mockery. Now Josephs is suing for $1.2 million on the grounds that the reaction made him look even sillier than he managed on his own.
The general public reaction to his suit has been:
1. Josephs should suck it up
2. Reminding everyone about the video is only going to expose him to even more abuse.
While likely true, there is a second aspect to this case that is worth considering. It’s the mistaken assumption of many internet users that they have the right to remain anonymous while heaping as much abuse as they please on anyone they please. After the video of Josephs was posted, one of the commenters allegedly wrote: “If this steroid addicted Nazi has children, they must be sooooo embarrassed.”
When contacted by a reporter, the author of the insult was highly indignant:
“I thought my opinion was my opinion in this country. I probably might not even post anymore,” said “theforcebewithme,” a 59-year-old government employee from New Brunswick who refused to give his real name.
Oh yeah, “freedom” means the right to remain anonymous and slander anyone you want. Fraid not, sonny Jim.
Online anonymity won’t necessarily protect people’s identities, as the website can be ordered by the court to provide users’ IP address and other information, said lawyer Tony Wong, a partner at Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP who specializes in media and privacy law.
On Friday, a Manhattan judge gave Google 15 days to reveal any information it has on the identities of three cyberbullies who labeled a woman a “whore” on YouTube.
“I think there’s a real ignorance among the public about the risks of posting user comments or Twittering or blogging. The technology is new but the same laws of libel apply,” said Wong.
“Every time you post a comment on YouTube, a newspaper’s website, a blog, you can be sued for defamation by anyone whose reputation has been harmed by your comment.”
Recently, Thomson Reuters announced it will no longer allow anonymous comments on its website. Maybe that’s the way of the future. Slagging off people anonymously may be fun, but it’s not smart, brave, mature or admirable. And guess what: The law still applies. Think about that next time you’re insulting someone while hiding behind an alias.
National Post
Read more: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/10/18/officer-bubbles-challenges-internet-anonymity/#ixzz12jkww9tj
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGMTm3QRwEc
Blogger John Baglow makes the case that Officer Bubbles — the Toronto cop who enfamed himself by confronting a young woman who was peacefully blowing bubbles during the G20 protests last spring — is in the process of doing himself even more damage.
The cop, Constable Adam Josephs, warned that if one bubble so much as touched him, the woman would be charged with assault. A video of the confrontation brought down tsunamis of mockery. Now Josephs is suing for $1.2 million on the grounds that the reaction made him look even sillier than he managed on his own.
The general public reaction to his suit has been:
1. Josephs should suck it up
2. Reminding everyone about the video is only going to expose him to even more abuse.
While likely true, there is a second aspect to this case that is worth considering. It’s the mistaken assumption of many internet users that they have the right to remain anonymous while heaping as much abuse as they please on anyone they please. After the video of Josephs was posted, one of the commenters allegedly wrote: “If this steroid addicted Nazi has children, they must be sooooo embarrassed.”
When contacted by a reporter, the author of the insult was highly indignant:
“I thought my opinion was my opinion in this country. I probably might not even post anymore,” said “theforcebewithme,” a 59-year-old government employee from New Brunswick who refused to give his real name.
Oh yeah, “freedom” means the right to remain anonymous and slander anyone you want. Fraid not, sonny Jim.
Online anonymity won’t necessarily protect people’s identities, as the website can be ordered by the court to provide users’ IP address and other information, said lawyer Tony Wong, a partner at Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP who specializes in media and privacy law.
On Friday, a Manhattan judge gave Google 15 days to reveal any information it has on the identities of three cyberbullies who labeled a woman a “whore” on YouTube.
“I think there’s a real ignorance among the public about the risks of posting user comments or Twittering or blogging. The technology is new but the same laws of libel apply,” said Wong.
“Every time you post a comment on YouTube, a newspaper’s website, a blog, you can be sued for defamation by anyone whose reputation has been harmed by your comment.”
Recently, Thomson Reuters announced it will no longer allow anonymous comments on its website. Maybe that’s the way of the future. Slagging off people anonymously may be fun, but it’s not smart, brave, mature or admirable. And guess what: The law still applies. Think about that next time you’re insulting someone while hiding behind an alias.
National Post
Read more: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/10/18/officer-bubbles-challenges-internet-anonymity/#ixzz12jkww9tj
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGMTm3QRwEc