Online anonimity has been stripped in a number of cases in North America with the latest being in a case in Nova Scotia, Canada. The Canadian case involved untrue postings about a fire chief and his deputy on a community web site. The judge ruled that the site owners must identify the poster ('s.)

A case here in TX., involved the publishing of personal information and identity of a person by another poster on the site. The judge ruled that the web owners must divulge the name of the person divulging the personal information. The person has since been sued by the victim and that case is pending.

In yet another case, this time in British Columbia, Canada a web site was ordered to divulge the name of a person posting derogatory and misleading information about a restaurant. It transpired that the person posting the erroneous information was a competitor.

Aaaaaand?

Selected circumstances do not overriding changes make.

Selected circumstances do not overriding changes make.But it would be interesting to read the reasons the individual judges gave for their decision.

Interesting, but why should posting on the internet make you above the law?

The internet is the wild west of the 21st century. I'm not saying its a good thing, but in the coming years we are bound to see the authorities cracking down on all the 'illegal' activity on the net.

Interesting, but why should posting on the internet make you above the law???????? I don't think I ever suggested anything of the kind. Might I assume your question was rhetorical?

I think it's the first word of the thread title which implies it.

Suggesting they had different rights.

But it would be interesting to read the reasons the individual judges gave for their decision.

Does that mean we can divulge that you are Sloyne, who was banned for making threats? :dunno:

:nuts:

Is online anonymity a 'right' at all?!

??????? I don't think I ever suggested anything of the kind. Might I assume your question was rhetorical?

yes

BTW, WTF is anonominity

without nonominity