By shelz.

The internet has turned into a cut throat kind of spot.  Folks push the boundaries of the 1^st amendment daily, dumping loads of questionable content on the world wide web.  Mean-spirited is the word of the day every day as bloggers play a vicious game of one upsmanship, seeing who can meld wit and disdain into the perfect shot.  It gets even more malicious when you are dealing with those who produce accusation and innuendo safely behind the wall of anonymity.  Not only can they say whatever they want, they can say it without repercussion.  Well, they could, but change may be on the horizon. 

Liskula Cohen is a model who was being targeted by a razor tongued (or fingered) blogger who wrote anonymously for the now defunct site, Skanks of New York. The writer called her names, questioned her mores, and even suggested she had no soul.  The average celebrity would scoff at it, ignore it, or cry in the dark about it.  Not Ms. Cohen.  She sued Google.  Not for defamation because hosts really aren’t held responsible for the content of the sites that operate under their umbrella.  Ms. Cohen sued for the writers IP and email address and won. 

Think about that for a second because this is a precedent setting case.  The cozy comfort the anonymous writer has been wrapped in may be on its way to extinction and it might take that devil may care attitude many anonymous bloggers operate under with it.  The average nameless faceless shit talker would probably not have the balls to say what they write if their identity was known. Fear of a subpoena or a midnight visit from a subject carrying a baseball bat is something most have probably never considered. 

What’s even more interesting is it’s not clear if Ms. Cohen even has a case.  The rules for proving defamation are very strict and she will have to prove this writer knew what she was saying wasn’t true and spread lies with malicious intent.  Ms. Cohen may also have to prove damages based solely on what this person wrote.  However, the strength of her defamation case was irrelevant to the court allowing Google to pass along this bloggers info.  In other words, the defamation itself is a different case.  The court knocked the wall this writer was hiding behind down simply so Cohen could sue her.  If it’s that easy the bandwagon will fill up quickly. 

Most folks feel that living under a microscope comes with fame and it’s something celebrities sign up for when they take that first step on the path to stardom. Their lives are public property and they have to live with it.  Turn about is fair play however. Those who have been playing spectator and blogging their way to i-fame by discussing the dirty laundry of others may find themselves at the other end of the public lens and it’s not a place they want to be.  With the strike of a gavel, not only will the writers identity become the property of the person they probably least want to have it, their lives could in turn become fodder for others. 

It is something many internet writers need to ponder.  It’s easy to sit behind a keyboard and fire shots all day, but how easy would it be to have those shots fired back?  Getting caught trying to stuff all your dirty laundry deeper into the back of your closet when the spotlight finds you could not only spell disaster for your writing career but your reputation as well.  Not to mention having to defend yourself in a court of law these days is pretty costly. 

So will this wrinkle in the case for 1^st amendment anonymous i-shit talking freedoms stop people from posting mean and possibly false statements about other folks on the net?  Probably not.  The ugly side of fame is big business and a kinder, gentler blog corp isn’t likely to develop from one unfortunate blogger being outed in judicial guinea pig fashion.  However, the precedent has been set.  Hopefully you won’t be next.

Follow Us on Twitter @ http://twitter.com/planetill

Follow shelz. on Twitter @ http://twitter.com/shelzp

Join Us on the Planet Ill Facebook Group for more discussion