4 ms·

Are there any other articles that detail exactly how this ruling makes it 'illegal' to have fake identities online? I have my doubts and at the very least would

by TrevorJ 18y ago

Are there any other articles that detail exactly how this ruling makes it 'illegal' to have fake identities online? I have my doubts and at the very least would like to read more.

m0nty 18y ago
And the other, related question: just how do "they" propose to stop us? Did I commit a criminal act when I signed up to HN using "m0nty" rather than my real name? Am I in fact trying to impersonate the other HN user "monty"? Does the fact that my real name is also shared by a moderately well-known UK politician mean I am, de facto, impersonating him? As your question implies, I think it's the bullying, not the anonymity, which was the issue in the court case.
- TrevorJ 18y ago
  http://www.marketingvox.com/watershed-ruling-in-myspace-suicide-case-may-criminalize-fake-net-personas-042175/ http://www.marketingvox.com/watershed-ruling-in-myspace-suic... This link would seem to indicate that it was not, in fact the bullying but the false identity that they convicted the defendant of.
  - m0nty 18y ago
    I still think the bullying was the issue. There was much talk when the story came out that (in point of law) an actual offence might not have been committed. So I think this represents the court casting about for some reason to convict, on some grounds, owing to public clamour. But does this set a precedent which will lead to the death of online anonymity? Not in itself, and it will be interesting to see if any other cases follow on from this one.
- aaronblohowiak 18y ago
  i like to hide behind my mysterious username as well.
- dhimes 18y ago
  I'm calling the cops.... But on a serious note, it was suggested to us in MA that our kids deliberately have a fictitious online id, so that predators can't find them.
  - wmf 18y ago
    I wonder what lesson that teaches.
sh1mmer 18y ago
The NYT seems to think it "provokes questions over online identity" (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/28/us/28internet.html?ref=technology http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/28/us/28internet.html?ref=tec...) not that they don't publish rhetorical Orwell inspired headlines. However, as I said above they jury upheld the site's TOS which is hardly a landmark ruling. The NYT says the difference was it's only previously been used to stop "hackers". I still don't see the excitement here. The TOS are a perfectly legitimate legal instrument to use against people violating the spirit of your site. It's common to see people in court over TOS violations caused by their bots. It seems equally obvious MySpace would be happy to press TOS infringement in this particularly heinous case.
- eucalyptus 18y ago
  Do you have examples of bot TOS violations going to court?
  - sh1mmer 18y ago
    First hit on Google for "bot tos violation court case" http://virtuallyblind.com/2008/07/14/blizzard-wins-sj-mdy/ http://virtuallyblind.com/2008/07/14/blizzard-wins-sj-mdy/
- wmf 18y ago
  The TOS are a perfectly legitimate legal instrument to use against people violating the spirit of your site. It's common to see people in court over TOS violations caused by their bots. A civil suit for violating a TOS is one thing, but this was a criminal case. Is it perfectly legitimate to put someone in jail for violating a TOS?

by TrevorJ 18y ago

Are there any other articles that detail exactly how this ruling makes it 'illegal' to have fake identities online? I have my doubts and at the very least would like to read more.

m0nty 18y ago

And the other, related question: just how do "they" propose to stop us? Did I commit a criminal act when I signed up to HN using "m0nty" rather than my real name? Am I in fact trying to impersonate the other HN user "monty"? Does the fact that my real name is also shared by a moderately well-known UK politician mean I am, de facto, impersonating him? As your question implies, I think it's the bullying, not the anonymity, which was the issue in the court case.

TrevorJ 18y ago
http://www.marketingvox.com/watershed-ruling-in-myspace-suicide-case-may-criminalize-fake-net-personas-042175/ http://www.marketingvox.com/watershed-ruling-in-myspace-suic... This link would seem to indicate that it was not, in fact the bullying but the false identity that they convicted the defendant of.
- m0nty 18y ago
  I still think the bullying was the issue. There was much talk when the story came out that (in point of law) an actual offence might not have been committed. So I think this represents the court casting about for some reason to convict, on some grounds, owing to public clamour. But does this set a precedent which will lead to the death of online anonymity? Not in itself, and it will be interesting to see if any other cases follow on from this one.
aaronblohowiak 18y ago
i like to hide behind my mysterious username as well.
dhimes 18y ago
I'm calling the cops.... But on a serious note, it was suggested to us in MA that our kids deliberately have a fictitious online id, so that predators can't find them.
- wmf 18y ago
  I wonder what lesson that teaches.

sh1mmer 18y ago

The NYT seems to think it "provokes questions over online identity" (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/28/us/28internet.html?ref=technology http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/28/us/28internet.html?ref=tec...) not that they don't publish rhetorical Orwell inspired headlines. However, as I said above they jury upheld the site's TOS which is hardly a landmark ruling. The NYT says the difference was it's only previously been used to stop "hackers". I still don't see the excitement here. The TOS are a perfectly legitimate legal instrument to use against people violating the spirit of your site. It's common to see people in court over TOS violations caused by their bots. It seems equally obvious MySpace would be happy to press TOS infringement in this particularly heinous case.

eucalyptus 18y ago
Do you have examples of bot TOS violations going to court?
- sh1mmer 18y ago
  First hit on Google for "bot tos violation court case" http://virtuallyblind.com/2008/07/14/blizzard-wins-sj-mdy/ http://virtuallyblind.com/2008/07/14/blizzard-wins-sj-mdy/
wmf 18y ago
The TOS are a perfectly legitimate legal instrument to use against people violating the spirit of your site. It's common to see people in court over TOS violations caused by their bots. A civil suit for violating a TOS is one thing, but this was a criminal case. Is it perfectly legitimate to put someone in jail for violating a TOS?