Comcast Identifies Anonymous Commenter In Online Comments Case

[HardOCP News]

You'd think an attorney would be smarter than this. Seriously, does anyone still think they are anonymous on the internet anymore?

“[The defendant] intended to convey the idea that [the plaintiff] was a pedophile or had engaged in sexual acts with children. Thus, the first factor is met,” writes the court, which also points out that claims of child molestation are verifiable through victim testimony. And though the court acknowledges that “the Internet is susceptible to hyperbole, exaggerations, and rhetoric, it is also a place where factual content is conveyed.

 

[Spidey329]

Did the article change? I don't see the excerpt. I went looking for it because I wanted context.

Is Hadley a verifiable pedo or was he just being trolled?

 

[viscountalpha]

If your dumb enough to commit a disgusting crime, your also not smart enough to hide it. I hope the guy burns in hell.

 

[Raudulfr]

Did the article change? I don't see the excerpt. I went looking for it because I wanted context.

Is Hadley a verifiable pedo or was he just being trolled?

No one knows? Apparently it's more important to know the identity of someone who (allegedly) said mean things on the Internet than to actually verify whether or not said claims are true.

 

[alxlwson]

If your dumb enough to commit a disgusting crime, your also not smart enough to hide it. I hope the guy burns in hell.

Usually when calling someone dumb, it's a good idea to not be dumb yourself.

you're, you're*

 

[Pez]

No one knows? Apparently it's more important to know the identity of someone who (allegedly) said mean things on the Internet than to actually verify whether or not said claims are true.

If someone made a claim, and if that claim was true, they should have evidence that would help authorities prove the claim in a court of law.

If I start saying "Person X rapes children" on the internet, do you think the authorities will go interview Person X? I would suspect they would try to find me to see if my statement was credible.

 

[wfalcon]

No one knows? Apparently it's more important to know the identity of someone who (allegedly) said mean things on the Internet than to actually verify whether or not said claims are true.

Was in the body of the article:

"Hadley is a Sandusky waiting to be exposed. Check out the view he has of Empire (Elementary School) from his front door," the commenter wrote. The comment was a reference to former Penn State football coach Jerry Sandusky, who was convicted of numerous counts of child sex abuse in 2012.

Seems pretty clear cut, so at this point the guy is using the "It could've been anyone on my IP since I have wifi" defense.

 

[Raudulfr]

If someone made a claim, and if that claim was true, they should have evidence that would help authorities prove the claim in a court of law.

If I start saying "Person X rapes children" on the internet, do you think the authorities will go interview Person X? I would suspect they would try to find me to see if my statement was credible.

I was merely commenting on the fact that nowhere was it stated that the allegations were false. All this ruckus about a defamatory comment about some local politician on an online article of some obscure local newspaper but no mention of if he really is a pedo or not?

 

[Spidey329]

I was merely commenting on the fact that nowhere was it stated that the allegations were false. All this ruckus about a defamatory comment about some local politician on an online article of some obscure local newspaper but no mention of if he really is a pedo or not?

That's the context I was looking for. It's hard to give judgement on Comcast for giving the name up if we don't know whether it was just a trolling (not true) or a potential victim speaking out. The latter would be poor taste for Comcast to leak the info. The former, eh, don't troll.