agreed...Did you read the article, it isn't about the rights of internet trolls at all. The whole thing is about being able to combat the internet trolls by taking them to court while staying anonymous so you don't publicly humiliate yourself.
They better come up with crystal clear definition of the term " Internet Troll ".
But come on folks I know the trolls are a pain in the ass but aren't the courts backed up enough with more important issues ?
Read the article... it has nothing to do with people trolling and the courts getting involved.
I tried to Tim but for some reason I couldn't pull it up.
I'll break it down for you then.
There was a girl who had found a website with nude pictures of her, her name, address and other personal information. The person that did this is being called a troll.
She had the information removed by contacting the website only to find it again a few weeks later.
The site is protected since they did try to help.
She is now suing the troll that put her information up. But she doesn't want to take it to court since all of this will come out in the media. Her children and family, co-workers and friends will find out about it. So the article talks about suing anonymously. Just like you can do if there is private information like medical info.
The basic premise of the article is, if you need to protect yourself from defamation by an internet troll, you should be able to do so anonymously, just as he did so anonymously to begin with.
The article didn't say what the outcome was...
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.