InfoWorld Home / Adventures in IT / Notes from the Field / Why Internet anonymity matters
August 31, 2009

Why Internet anonymity matters

Google is at the heart of another Net anonymity battle, this one between muckraking journalists and a Caribbean land developer. Will the search giant roll over and crush the little guys?

| Print | 10 comments|
355 Recommendations

Over the last few weeks I've spent probably too much time thinking and writing about the Liskula Cohen libel case ("Skanks for nothing: Google must identify 'anonymous' blogger" and "A skank discussion: Privacy, anonymity, and misogyny.")

Mostly because a) it's a lot of fun, and b) it concerns one of my favorite topics, the always lively Internet Anonymity vs. Privacy vs. Personal Responsibility debate. Besides, how often does an IT blogger get to write about catty supermodels, skanky or otherwise?

[ Also on InfoWorld: "A skank discussion: Privacy, anonymity, and misogyny" | Stay up to date on Robert X. Cringely's musings and observations with InfoWorld's Notes from the Underground newsletter. ]

Today I'm hitting that topic again, but from the opposite direction.

Despite what some tenacious commenters may have thought, I was not defending the right of the now-not-so-anonymous blogger (better known as 29-year-old Rosemary Port) to anonymously defame. Otherwise, the Internet would be one big slanderfest (or, at least, more of a slanderfest than it already is). There needs to be some disincentive for completely juvenile behavior.

But today brings news of a case where anonymity on the Net absolutely needs to be protected. It too involves a court subpoena ordering Google to turn over private information; in this case, the names of the owners of tcijournal@gmail.com, the e-mail address for The TCI Journal, a muckracking news site based in the Turks & Caicos Islands.

Apparently, people in T&C don't spend all their time listening to Jimmy Buffet, eating conch, and drinking mojitos out of hollowed-out pineapples with little umbrellas stuck in them. They also spend time exposing people who allegedly bribe government officials.

Attorneys for one of the alleged bribers, developer Dr. Cem Kinay, are now suing The TCI Journal in California in what some are calling a case of "libel tourism." (Not to be confused with a defamation vacation.) In other words, the developer in T&C chose to sue in a California court because U.S. courts make it easier to demand a company's records.

Related Content...
additional resources
White Paper - How to Improve Delivery of Advanced Web Applications

White Paper

Virtual Workforce: The Key to Expanding The Business While Cutting Costs

Get the independent advice and expertise you need to support a virtual workforce.

Go inside:
The three-step approach to making a virtual workforce a reality.
The four flavors of client virtualization technologies.
The three key initiatives that solve IT challenges.
Download now »
White Paper: Successfully Secure Your Wireless LAN With Wi-Fi firewalls.

White Paper

Addressing Linux Threats Leveraging Fewer Resources

The increase in Linux popularity has increased the frequency and sophistication of malware attacks. Read this 2 page white paper now to learn how you can protect your Linux environment with real-time protection that is certified by all major Linux vendors.

Download now »
White Paper - The 2009 Handbook of Application Delivery

White Paper

The 2009 Handbook of Application Delivery

Ensuring acceptable application delivery will become even more difficult over the next few years. As a result, IT organizations need to ensure that the approach that they take to resolving the current application delivery challenges can scale to support the emerging challenges. This handbook elaborates on the key tasks associated with planning, optimization, management and control and provides decision criteria to help IT organizations choose appropriate solutions.

Download now »
White Paper - Is Your Backup System Outdated?

White Paper

Mid-range Storage Considerations

A common misconception is that mid-range storage requirements are dramatically different than that of a larger enterprise. Mid-range storage users may require less capacity, but they have similar functionality and management requirements. This ESG paper examines mid-range storage needs and reviews a new solution that adjusts size while retaining value, performance and functionality.

Download now »
10 of 10 comments
Sign In or Register to comment
A0110915 31-Aug-09 12:12pm
1 reply
So anonymity is necessary for the little guy but not OK for the big guy? We need a better solution than that. I noted another article about how we're losing the war on cybercrime. Anonymity is one of the main reasons. It's a fundamental flaw in the internet - you can't identify the criminals.
Gray_Hair 31-Aug-09 1:00pm
Oh troll of trolldumb, we are losing the war on cyber crime because of software defects and deficiencies in software development tools exacerbated by naive users. The internet is just fine, working just as it was intended. If you want more security on the net use IPv6.
RamboTribble 31-Aug-09 12:44pm
Let the plaintiff prove the libel in a court of law, then give them a subpoena to identify the defendants. In cases such as this, doing it the other way around is putting the cart in front of the horse.
mysticturner 31-Aug-09 12:52pm
1 reply
The founding fathers of the U. S. solved this problem long ago. The solution is not to protect anonymity in a public arena. It is to protect the freedom to speak or write the truth. The author is, and should be responsible for the things he writes. Each of us is responsible for our acts. If our acts are called into the light, the crucible of the court can find truth and the penalty of liable will fall on the author who destroys and likewise, the penalty of law will fall on those who break it. The US Constitution does not provide the right to speak/write libalous rants on someone. It provides the right to speak the truth. As an additional area of discussion, I suggest 'Absence of Malice' wherein the responsiblility of the author is called into question. Also I found an intersting article on the subject: http://www.scribd.com/doc/391446/Absence-of-Malice
RamboTribble 31-Aug-09 3:04pm
2 replies
So, if someone writes about the mob and names names, just because he posts those writings in a public forum, he should be the willing target of hit men? The founding fathers assumed a civil society. That went the way of the carrier pigeon long ago.
tcapun 31-Aug-09 4:01pm
I'm not so sure the founding fathers assumed much, rather they practiced sanity in a very politically dangerous environment. They had, after all, the don of dons to worry about, king george, who didn't have hit men, he had hit armies and hit navys, a real dangerous fellow.

I believe that google should respond to court orders, otherwise, they are operating outside of the law.

The flaw here is "muckrakers" who are too stupid to use one of the truly anonymous sources of email, such as hotmail or yahoo.

Have you ever tried deleting an email on gmail? It may not be possible. They insist on archiving it even after you say delete.
mysticturner 1-Sep-09 6:48am
If a reporter does as you suggest, he is opening himself to the very real possibility of dying. That comes with the job. Judges and reporters take on very serious responsibilities when they agree to that task. The reporter who is not willing to bear that burden should consider writing the garden column. Likewise the mob member knows all too well the implications of his life choices. He is quite likely to be jailed, executed, or murdered by his competitor.
zornwil 31-Aug-09 8:22pm
The Founding Fathers did not presume a civil society, in fact they worried quite a bit about mob rule (and of course lived in a less democratic time, not just in terms of women and blacks not being able to vote but even classes of white males not able to vote). They also viewed government as the resource competing interests would vie for in order to force their will. So they tried to set up a system which could withstand this and would balance the competition of resources. Of course, some of the Founding Fathers (or at least their fellow travellers) also thrived on anonymity in writing pamphlets before the revolution and of course many of the public writings of the Founding Fathers during the debates about federalism which were published in papers were in fact anonymous, although often only thinly so. Anonymity has place at the very foundation of the Republic. That said, there's a fundamental right in court to face your accuser, as well, and there are reasonable situations requiring transparency to witnesses. Even journalistic sources have not been protected by courts, contrasting the nobility (at least let's simply assume that for sake of argument) of the journalist protecting his source with American law. I think it is important not to privilege Internet anonymity above "traditional" anonymity. Just as in the legal tradition, it's not an easy call. I think we have to tread carefully to not have too chilling an effect on the would-be Deep Throats of the world. That said, advocates of anonymity should be sure to challenge the legal tradition at hand here and not attempt to invent a new tradition for the Internet.
Pronounce 2-Sep-09 3:55pm
Ignoring the rest of the world's perception of the USofA for a moment and considering the general populace from an economists' point of view: The majority of US citizens tend to believe that their government and the Courts favor the haves over the have-nots. I believe that the revolving-door view of the US government and big business is probably at a historical all-time high. And from this I surmise that the majority of US citizens would think that any decision in this case from our Courts would favor gold over good. We know there are tyrants and "bullies" today in our world. But the average American might be shocked to learn that much of the rest of world views the US (government) at the top of their bully list, and a threat to their national security. Thankfully there are a few cultures left that believe the US stands for truth and justice, but their number is dwindling. I have to wonder then if we will survive the coming decades of global economic changes with no friends?
dmarois 5-Sep-09 6:34am
"The US Constitution does not provide the right to speak/write libalous rants on someone. It provides the right to speak the truth." Who decides what the truth is? Anyone who's lived on this planet for any length of time is aware of how the truth can be manipulated to favour one side over the other. Our judicial systems have proven time and again that they are essentially incapable of executing (no pun intended) the task of finding the truth with any consistency

Sign up to receive InfoWorld Resource Alerts

Subscribe to the Robert X. Cringely: Notes from the Trenches Newsletter

The one-stop resource center for IT professionals.

©1994-2010 Infoworld, Inc.