Websites forced to reveal user identity

Tuesday, 20 March, 2001, 15:43 GMT - A High Court judge has told two UK
websites to reveal which user was behind defamatory messages placed in
discussion groups.

Legal action launched by net company Totalise has ended with the financial
websites the Motley Fool and Interactive Investor International being
forced to hand over the identity of the user who was only known online by a
nickname.

The ruling could have implications for any website that lets people post
messages anonymously.

Web law experts said the ruling showed that the online world was no longer
regarded as a special case and should be subject to offline laws.

Web defence

The case centred on comments posted on the financial websites by a user
that went by the nickname of Zeddust.

Defamatory comments about net service provider Totalise appeared first on
the Motley Fool website. The Motley Fool webmasters removed the comments
and banned Zeddust when told about their existence, but declined requests
to reveal who exactly was posting the messages.

Once banned from the Motley Fool, Zeddust then popped up on Interactive
Investor International and posted more defamatory messages about Totalise.
When asked, Interactive Investor removed the offending comments, and banned
Zeddust from its service. But Interactive Investor also refused to reveal
the exact identity of Zeddust.

In a bid to find out who was behind the messages, Totalise launched a legal
action, and now a High Court judge has found in its favour.

Ruling in the case, Mr Justice Robert Owen said the messages posted by
Zeddust were clearly defamatory and that, unless he ruled for Totalise,
people would be able to defame with impunity online.

Offline goes online

Totalise is now expected to launch a libel action against the person who
posted the defamatory messages.

In the past, many net service providers have escaped censure because they
simply acted as carriers of data and did not edit the information they
passed on. But Mr Justice Robert Owen said this defence did not apply to
the Motley Fool because it did monitor and manage discussions on its site.

The ruling was made on 19 February but has only now been written up in law
reports.

Nick Lockett, a solicitor and net law expert from Stanhope and Hooper, said
the ruling was not a landmark judgement, but was simply reminding net
companies of their responsibilities under UK law.

"There have always been specific provisions under UK law, from long before
the first day of the internet, that said if you are in possession of
information that identifies a wrong-doer then you can be ordered to hand it
over," said Mr Lockett.

The ruling also showed that the net should not be regarded as a special
case, said Mr Lockett. "The internet is just a sophisticated communications
tool and is an integral part of business life just like the fax or telephone."

Related to this story:
Demon settles net libel case (30 Mar 00 | Sci/Tech)
EU votes yes to net piracy law (14 Feb 01 | Entertainment)
Net leaves the law behind (02 Aug 00 | Business)
007 composer wins libel action (19 Mar 01 | Europe)
The Fool slashes dot.com jobs (09 Feb 01 | Business)

Internet links:
Totalise
Interactive Investor
Motley Fool UK

By BBC News Online's technology correspondent Mark Ward
BBC News Online: Sci/Tech
http://news.bbc.co.uk/low/english/sci/tech/newsid_1231000/1231419.stm

janet paterson, an akinetic rigid subtype, albeit perky, parky
PD: 54/41/37 CD: 54/44/43 TEL: 613 256 8340 EMAIL: [log in to unmask]
"A New Voice" home page: http://www.geocities.com/janet313/     .
"New Voice News" latest posts: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nvnNET/     .

----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn