Yale Students' Lawsuit Unmasks Anonymous Trolls

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Yale students have opened a can of worms with a lawsuit that unmasks forum “trolls”. The case has gotten pretty ugly so far, with lawsuits flying everywhere…even against the attorneys involved in the case.

Now lawyers for two female Yale Law School students have ascertained AK-47's real identity, along with the identities of other AutoAdmit posters, who all now face the likely publication of their names in court records -- potentially marking a death sentence for the comment trolls' budding legal careers even before the case has gone to trial.
Click to expand...
 
I'm not one to defend trolls....but I am not sure why the plaintiffs are "Jane Doe1 & 2" but the defendants names are printed for everyone to see....how does that work in a system where people are innocent until prove guilty??
 
I've seen a few mentions of possibly moving to using true identification on the internet. How would everyone feel if you had to use your real name for online things, or if your real name was at least connected to all of your internet accounts?

Personally, I think that more accountability would make the internet a better place as a whole. People would treat each other more like we do face to face. There will still be assholes, but they won't be empowered by anonymity!
 
Ah, internet forums. Where would we be without them?

IMO, the owner of the forum has the rights to do anything he wants with it. If you're going to run your mouth on the forum, you better be damn sure you can face the consequence. Otherwise keep them shut.
 
I am very much opposed to this. Part of what allows such widespread free speech on the internet (with sites like wikileaks) is the relative anonymity. Take away that anonymity, and it will become a much more restricted space.
 
"Now they're asking the judge to give them additional time to try and determine the identities of the remaining defendants, who are currently being sued under their AutoAdmit handles: among others, PaulieWalnuts, Cheese Eating Surrender Monkey, The Ayatollah of Rock-n-Rollah, Patrick Bateman and HitlerHitlerHitler."

I'd like to call The Ayatollah of Rock-n-Rollah to the stand.
 
I think it's retarded, unless these so call "anonymous" people have done physical threats, or real physical notes indicating what they are going to do, they have NO RIGHT to reveal the names of the trolls that posted on that forum.

I don't like breaching privacy, and if the forum didn't enforce or state the rules, then I believe they don't got the right to do that.

There are a ton of people that write stupid comments and don't mean them everyday. Should we investigate each forum post for that? No.

People need to grow up and move on. This isn't elementary school where gossip and rumors hurt your feelings.
 
wiseoracle said:
I think it's retarded, unless these so call "anonymous" people have done physical threats, or real physical notes indicating what they are going to do, they have NO RIGHT to reveal the names of the trolls that posted on that forum.
Click to expand...

How about threats of rape and sodomy, is that enough?
 
Human beings suffer from short term memory failure. We forget how schools get shot up in the name of our freedom of speech. And when schools do get shot up, we forget free speech and wonder why nobody took precautions to keep this from happening. It's back and forth and back and forth again.

They can't win.
 
^
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety
 
bholstege said:
^
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety
Click to expand...

Fuck liberty when it comes to safety. The Constitution is not a suicide pact. I would much rather they expose people who makes threatening comments on a school forum than to watch my children get shot.
 
Ahh, free speech and freedom... it's what let's dumb people be dumb and smart people be smart. Unfortunately dumb people make up a larger portion of the world

So imagine if China had a democratic government... would you want your country's fate in the hands of 1 billion uneducated farmers? I think not...
 
I don't believe this is going to work.

It's just far too easy to fake any credentials you want online, and I don't know how anyone can fix that. In this space, you can be anybody you want.
 
Azhar said:
Human beings suffer from short term memory failure. We forget how schools get shot up in the name of our freedom of speech. And when schools do get shot up, we forget free speech and wonder why nobody took precautions to keep this from happening. It's back and forth and back and forth again.

They can't win.
Click to expand...

Who says that freedom of speech comes with anonymity? These students are still "free" to speak their mind, they simply are identified as saying them.

It seems to me that the Declaration of Independence was signed by the writers. I think the founding fathers believed in freedom of speech, but figured we'd have the stones to put our name to our opinions.

Threats of violence are not covered by the first amendment.
Click to expand...

Good point - many types of speech are not covered by free speech - obscenity is another example.
 
bonsai said:
How about threats of rape and sodomy, is that enough?
Click to expand...

Bullseye! Anyone who tries to apply "freedom of speech" to cases like this are way off the mark.Threatening assault,falsely ruining a person's reputation,these things aren't covered by that amendment.Trolls are cowards who hide behind their anonymity.These people don't deserve to have a legal career,since they have no respect for the law or other people.
 
Waffletron said:
I've seen a few mentions of possibly moving to using true identification on the internet. How would everyone feel if you had to use your real name for online things, or if your real name was at least connected to all of your internet accounts?

Personally, I think that more accountability would make the internet a better place as a whole. People would treat each other more like we do face to face. There will still be assholes, but they won't be empowered by anonymity!
Click to expand...

Disagree. The internet should remain as anonymous as possible, to allow an environment as characterized by chaos as possible. That is the beauty of the Internet. Human nature is not afraid to show its face.
 
Perhaps it's just me, but I don't see comments were the users were inciting people to do things or threatening anyone (though granted I haven't been following this case). One of them said "Women named Jill and Hillary should be raped" ... he's not telling people "Go rape a woman named Jill or Hillary". Do I think it's a shitty thing to say? Sure it is. Do I think it's "court worthy"? Absolutely not. Nothing is keeping those woman on that site, but them; they're free to leave at any time.

I look at it as akin to going to a KKK meeting, then trying to take them to court for what they say. It may be stupid, mindless drivel, but it it's protected under Freedom of Speech.
 
Cyrilix said:
Disagree. The internet should remain as anonymous as possible, to allow an environment as characterized by chaos as possible. That is the beauty of the Internet. Human nature is not afraid to show its face.
Click to expand...

The internet is indeed extremely chaotic because of anonymitity, which may indeed be true human nature.

However, if you look at the poster child for anonymous internet usage, I think you may see that chaos is not the best thing. Go visit 4chan, then tell me about Anonymous. :eek:
 
I don't have a problem with being exposed for threats. I have a problem with being exposed at all. It is much easier to have free speech when your are anonymous. This is the principle behind wikileaks and freenet
 
Azhar said:
Fuck liberty when it comes to safety. The Constitution is not a suicide pact. I would much rather they expose people who makes threatening comments on a school forum than to watch my children get shot.
Click to expand...

The reason it's not a suicide pact is because we can pass amendments, and so far that hasn't happened. The entire way schools treat students in terms of civil liberties is disgusting, and a violation of their fundamental human rights.

And if you honestly believe that "threatening comments on a school forum" lead to mass murder, you need to go hang out with Jack Thompson.
 
Steve said:
I'm not one to defend trolls....but I am not sure why the plaintiffs are "Jane Doe1 & 2" but the defendants names are printed for everyone to see....how does that work in a system where people are innocent until prove guilty??
Click to expand...

It's been "working" for a good long time now. This is most evident in high profile "rape" cases. Remember Kobe Bryant? Whether he did it or not, his reputation took a hit and his name is now associated with that in our minds. Anyone remember the news commenting on who the plaintiffs were? Anyone?

How about the Duke University Lacrosse team rape case?

Whatever the case in our legal system, people have been able to drag other peoples' names through the mud with little consequences to their own identity. While "innocent until proven guilty" may be the motto of sorts, it is definitely not the case in many of court proceedings.
 
Waffletron said:
The internet is indeed extremely chaotic because of anonymitity, which may indeed be true human nature.

However, if you look at the poster child for anonymous internet usage, I think you may see that chaos is not the best thing. Go visit 4chan, then tell me about Anonymous. :eek:
Click to expand...

I browse 4chan regularly so that's not something you need to tell me. I browse 4chan when I want the random stupidity that makes me laugh or satisfies my human nature. I visit [H] when I want my more moderated technology talk, so removing one of these facets of my web browsing would be quite annoying.
 
Waffletron said:
I've seen a few mentions of possibly moving to using true identification on the internet. How would everyone feel if you had to use your real name for online things, or if your real name was at least connected to all of your internet accounts?

Personally, I think that more accountability would make the internet a better place as a whole. People would treat each other more like we do face to face. There will still be assholes, but they won't be empowered by anonymity!
Click to expand...
+1
QFT.

wiseoracle said:
I think it's retarded, unless these so call "anonymous" people have done physical threats, or real physical notes indicating what they are going to do, they have NO RIGHT to reveal the names of the trolls that posted on that forum.

I don't like breaching privacy, and if the forum didn't enforce or state the rules, then I believe they don't got the right to do that.

There are a ton of people that write stupid comments and don't mean them everyday. Should we investigate each forum post for that? No.

People need to grow up and move on. This isn't elementary school where gossip and rumors hurt your feelings.
Click to expand...
You're right, this isn't middle school. Its the real world, where it's NOT okay to defame someone. Imagine if you were googling your own name, and you find '[Your name here] has herpes'. I know I would be a little pissed if it were me.

bonsai said:
How about threats of rape and sodomy, is that enough?
Click to expand...
I was going to point out slander, but Bonsai wins with assault! (By definition in tort law, yes, this is assault providing the defendants can prove they took them seriously.)

Azhar said:
Fuck liberty when it comes to safety. The Constitution is not a suicide pact. I would much rather they expose people who makes threatening comments on a school forum than to watch my children get shot.
Click to expand...

Who needs personal liberties? Police states ftw!:rolleyes:
bonsai said:
Threats of violence are not covered by the first amendment.
Click to expand...
You're right, they're covered by hundreds of years of court precidents.

mastertard said:
...imagine if China had a democratic government... would you want your country's fate in the hands of 1 billion uneducated farmers? I think not...
Click to expand...

Right, that would suck. That's why the United States is a representative republic instead of a true democracy.:p
 
Gambit said:
Perhaps it's just me, but I don't see comments were the users were inciting people to do things or threatening anyone (though granted I haven't been following this case). One of them said "Women named Jill and Hillary should be raped" ... he's not telling people "Go rape a woman named Jill or Hillary". Do I think it's a shitty thing to say? Sure it is. Do I think it's "court worthy"? Absolutely not. Nothing is keeping those woman on that site, but them; they're free to leave at any time.

I look at it as akin to going to a KKK meeting, then trying to take them to court for what they say. It may be stupid, mindless drivel, but it it's protected under Freedom of Speech.
Click to expand...

And what about the posts where they named females students and claimed they were going to repeatly sexually assult them? Should that just be ignored as the woman never got raped yet.
 
AutoAdmit isn't a regular school forum. It's the law school forum equivalent of 4chan.

It's disgusting and useless but at the same time anyone who would actually take anything said there seriously is an idiot. Those "threats" are not real threats.

And we're talking about well-educated adults here, not pimply-faced teens who are going to go out and shoot up their high school. Yes, they are classless and crude, empowered by the anonymity of the internet, but anyone who doesn't like it (which really should be just about everyone...) should just ignore it.
 
SexTreX said:
Good try ace, but your freedom of speech has limitations. Try googling the tort law definitions of assault, slander and libel.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I know that. Again, I don't have a problem with the case, I have a problem with the precedent.
 
rhouck said:
AutoAdmit isn't a regular school forum. It's the law school forum equivalent of 4chan.

It's disgusting and useless but at the same time anyone who would actually take anything said there seriously is an idiot. Those "threats" are not real threats.

And we're talking about well-educated adults here, not pimply-faced teens who are going to go out and shoot up their high school. Yes, they are classless and crude, empowered by the anonymity of the internet, but anyone who doesn't like it (which really should be just about everyone...) should just ignore it.
Click to expand...

Again, as with most "news" just becuase you know something isn't true doesn't mean that everyone does.

This CAN hurt a person's career or cause them problems. Especially when they ensure that this is the information that comes up first about you in a web search.

In this case, it went from this forum, to The Washington Post then to news shows. That is drawing attention to these posting and help to "harm" the women. This is all BEFORE the lawsuit was filed.

I think these are legit claims to file upon.
 
So who determines what is trolling and what isn't? At what point does that line skew in favor of a political party or beliefs and others are punished for speaking out or "trolling"?

If you want to live in a country where the internet is controlled in such a manner, go live in China, not the US.
 
Eickst said:
So who determines what is trolling and what isn't? At what point does that line skew in favor of a political party or beliefs and others are punished for speaking out or "trolling"?

If you want to live in a country where the internet is controlled in such a manner, go live in China, not the US.
Click to expand...

They're not suing them for being trolls. They're suing them for overstepping the limits of their free speech, E.G. threats and slander.
 
Eickst said:
So who determines what is trolling and what isn't? At what point does that line skew in favor of a political party or beliefs and others are punished for speaking out or "trolling"?

If you want to live in a country where the internet is controlled in such a manner, go live in China, not the US.
Click to expand...

This is no different than making a threat to someones face, clearly you don't have an understanding of the legal system. You are liable for what you say, defamation of character is a viable reason to sue, and the fact that they were threatening physical harm to someone means that these ladies can and should press charges against the lot of them. So before you jump on your little soap box maybe you should have some basic understanding of the legal system, yes you can say whatever you want in this country and there is no control to stop you, but you are liable for what you say and your actions. All the internet does is allow people to hide behind a handle and a keyboard.
 
Cyrilix said:
Disagree. The internet should remain as anonymous as possible, to allow an environment as characterized by chaos as possible. That is the beauty of the Internet. Human nature is not afraid to show its face.
Click to expand...
Oddly, that really seems like something I would agree with. You get raw human interaction without that silly fear of something negative happening to you in real life. An uncensored view into the darwinistic source of our human nature.

SexTreX said:
Right, that would suck. That's why the United States is a representative republic instead of a true democracy.:p
Click to expand...

Yup, I think almost half of the people living in the US isn't smart enough to even form a valid political opinion.

rhouck said:
AutoAdmit isn't a regular school forum. It's the law school forum equivalent of 4chan.

It's disgusting and useless but at the same time anyone who would actually take anything said there seriously is an idiot. Those "threats" are not real threats.

And we're talking about well-educated adults here, not pimply-faced teens who are going to go out and shoot up their high school. Yes, they are classless and crude, empowered by the anonymity of the internet, but anyone who doesn't like it (which really should be just about everyone...) should just ignore it.
Click to expand...

But then we come to a catch-22 situation. Should you ignore such negativity festering or should you do something about it? Maybe you could wait until someone actually gets hurt for "proof" before taking action. This falls right in that vague gray area so, it's like, who really knows?
 
Waffletron said:
I've seen a few mentions of possibly moving to using true identification on the internet. How would everyone feel if you had to use your real name for online things, or if your real name was at least connected to all of your internet accounts?

Personally, I think that more accountability would make the internet a better place as a whole. People would treat each other more like we do face to face. There will still be assholes, but they won't be empowered by anonymity!
Click to expand...

great so people who use fake info (which would be possible) could then easily get real people's info and cause who knows what damage, GREAT idea!

you forget, not everyone follows the rules, laws are made for those who follow them.l....
 
Waffletron said:
I've seen a few mentions of possibly moving to using true identification on the internet. How would everyone feel if you had to use your real name for online things, or if your real name was at least connected to all of your internet accounts?

Personally, I think that more accountability would make the internet a better place as a whole. People would treat each other more like we do face to face. There will still be assholes, but they won't be empowered by anonymity!
Click to expand...

I think that's a terrible idea that destroys part of what makes the Internet great. I'm not considered a "bad" person and I have the sense not to run my mouth online, but that doesn't mean I want people to know who I am online. The Internet can be a haven where you can be free from the inhibitions of "real" life. Nobody will be prejudice toward me because the online me is just a faceless Joe or Jane. If I wanted to be treated as I do in face-to-face conversation then I'd turn off the computer and talk to someone.

Besides, how many of us will still browse and download porn if we had to reveal our real identities in the process?
 
SexTreX said:
Who needs personal liberties? Police states ftw!:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

It's called probable cause. If a network admin or security thinks the statement is a prequel to violence, they have every rights and a duty to make sure it isn't. Liberty has nothing to do with it, and free speech doesn't exist on private internet forums.
 
What a lot of people seem to be missing is that the internet isn't a madeup place. Other people on it are real. Your actions on it have real consequences. If I buy something online I use real money that comes out of a real bank account. If I send pictures of myself to somebody then they have pictures of me. If I post my daily schedule online for everyone to see, then anyone who wants to know where I am knows where I am. And if I make threaten comment to somebody then I am making real threats to a real person. I think that we all should have the ablity to remain anonymous to each other with in reason. The moment you go beyond the line of illegal activity, then screw you your right to be unknown is gone. There is a difference between being a troll and making threats against somebody and posting slander about them. Me including in this post that so an so is an asshole would be trolling. Me posting personal information and lies about some person in an attempt to ruin their life/career is not trolling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top