The long-running case of Solers, Inc. v. Doe in the District of Columbia raises the interesting dilemma of balancing significant free speech rights with the interest of an alleged "victim" to pursue claims against an alleged anonymous defamer. Usually, this issue arises in the context of an online message board poster's public diatribe against someone or something, made under a pseudonym. The alleged victim then sues the poster under the name "John Doe" and immediately subpoenas the web site host or publisher to try to discover the real identity of the poster. Thus far, courts have acknowledged the transcendental importance of free speech and, for the most part, blocked disclosure of the posters' identities. A collection of some of those cases is described here. In Solers, there is a twist. An informant ("whistleblower") made a private report to the SIIA via a piracy reporting link on the SIIA's web site, and Solers subsequently embarked on a quest to unmask that informant. The latest appellate ruling in the case is a mixed bag for Solers, establishing significant hurdles that make it unlikely for Solers to acquire the identity of the informant, but giving Solers one more shot to try. More significantly, the decision adds to a body of case law addressing when an alleged claim of wrongdoing may overcome the First Amendment right to make anonymous speech.
More...