Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
January 14, 2014
The US Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized rights to speak anonymously derived from the First Amendment.
The Virginia Court of Appeals has ruled
that Yelp users have no right to anonymity when they post negative
comments about a business online. The ruling was handed down after the
owner of a carpet-cleaning business said criticism about his business was not posted by customers.
“The Virginia statute makes the judge a
gatekeeper to decide whether or not there’s a common-sense reason for
someone in our position to get this information” on a Yelp user, a lawyer
for Hadeed Oriental Carpet Cleaning argued. “In order for someone like
Joe Hadeed to find out who these people are, he has to explain his case,
and if he can convince the judge that there might be a real lawsuit
against this person, the judge can then say, ‘Yes, you can get this
information.’”
“Generally, a Yelp review is entitled to
First Amendment protection because it is a person’s opinion about a
business that they patronized,” the judge in the case ruled. “If the
reviewer was never a customer of the business, then the review is not an
opinion; instead the review is based on a false statement” and the
reviewer is not entitled to anonymity.
“We are disappointed that the Virginia
Court of Appeals has issued a ruling that fails to adequately protect
free speech rights on the internet, and which allows businesses to seek
personal details about website users — without any evidence of
wrongdoing — in efforts to silence online critics,” a lawyer for Yelp
said.
Vince Sollitto, a spokesman for Yelp,
said Virginia should adopt “strong protections in order to prevent
online speech from being stifled by those upset with what has been
said.”
The court ruling runs counter to the
tradition of anonymous speech in the United States. The Supreme Court
has recognized on numerous occasions the right to speak anonymously and
has associated this right to the First Amendment. The right to speak
anonymously transcends any supposed harm a business claims negative
comments have done to its reputation.
“Protections for anonymous speech are
vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their
identities frees them to express critical minority views,” the Supreme
Court ruled in the McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission in 1995.
“Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority…. It thus
exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights and of the First
Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from
retaliation… at the hand of an intolerant society.”
“The tradition of anonymous speech is older than the United States,” notes the Electronic Freedom Foundation.
“Founders Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay wrote the
Federalist Papers under the pseudonym ‘Publius’ and ‘the Federal Farmer’
spoke up in rebuttal. The US Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized
rights to speak anonymously derived from the First Amendment.”
Polls show Americans value the First Amendment and the right to online anonymity. In September, Pew Internet
posted the result of a poll showing that nearly 60 percent of those
surveyed believe people should have the ability to use the internet
completely anonymously.
This article was posted: Tuesday, January 14, 2014 at 10:53 am
No comments:
Post a Comment