Vogue model wins right to unmask offensive blogger Follow

A Vogue cover girl has won a precedent-setting court battle to unmask an anonymous blogger who called her a “*****” on the internet.

In a case with potentially far-reaching repercussions, Liskula Cohen sought the identity of the blogger who maligned her on the ****** in NYC blog so that she could sue him or her for defamation.

A Manhattan supreme court judge ruled that she was entitled to the information and ordered Google, which ran the offending blog, to turn it over.

Ms Cohen, a tall, Canadian blonde who has modelled for Giorgio Armani and Versace, went to court after reading the wounding anonymous comments on Google’s Blogger.com.

“I would have to say the first-place award for ‘Skankiest in NYC’ would have to go to Liskula Gentile Cohen,” the blogger “Anonymous” wrote in one posting. The blog, since removed, ridiculed the former Australian Vogue covergirl as a “40-something” who “may have been hot 10 years ago”, when she was actually 36.

Justice Joan Madden rejected the blogger’s claim that the blogs “serve as a modern-day forum for conveying personal opinions, including invective and ranting”, and should not be treated as factual assertions.

The model was looking forward last night to discovering the identity of the alleged acquaintance who insulted her. “Everybody is waiting to see who this coward is,” Steven Wagner, her lawyer, said.

Andrew Pederson, a Google spokesman, said: “We sympathise with anyone who may be the victim of cyberbullying. We also take great care to respect privacy concerns and will only provide information about a user in response to a subpoena or other court order.”

Not hot.

Goodbye freedom of speech (does this even apply to US based servers/hosting companies?). Personal opinion isn't defamation of character, is it? Does the difference between "I think you are" and "you are" matter?

I do so wish people would get over this naive assumption that the concept of Freedom of Speech means you can say/write anything you feel like saying about anyone at any time.

Freedom of speech stops where slander/libel begin, particularly when that slander/libel has the chance of impacting the target's livelihood.

She's a model. She makes her living by looking youthful and pretty. Accusing her of being "40-something" (especially if one knows this claim to be false and willfully makes it anyway) could potentially impact her marketability and hence, her livelihood.

I do so wish people would get over this naive assumption that the concept of Freedom of Speech means you can say/write anything you feel like saying about anyone at any time. It doesn't, and it never has. You still have to be responsible for the veracity of the words you speak/write and can be held accountable if your words turn out to be false (except, y'know, if you're a notable Republican making absurd and outrageous claims about health care.)

The classic example is yelling "fire!" in a crowded theater. You can be held responsible for any trampling deaths that occur in the stampede that follows your utterance, because that stampede was a foreseeable harmful consequence of your utterance.

Not at all. The onus of taking responsibility for one's utterances has always been part and parcel of free speech. You can, and should be, held legally accountable when making false statements, particularly when harm to other people is a foreseeable result of those statements.

The classic example is yelling "fire!" in a crowded theater. You can be held responsible for any trampling deaths that occur in the stampede that follows your utterance, because that stampede was a foreseeable harmful consequence of your utterance.

Free speech does not, and never has, meant carte blanche to say whatever we want whenever we want about whoever we want with no thought to the potential consequences. Own your words.

Now you're just being deliberately obtuse, but whatever.

The scale of the offense doesn't matter. If you're not willing to own your words and accept responsibility for them, don't put them out there. It's as simple as that. It's why we have laws against libel, slander, inciting to riot, and a lot of other offenses, laws that are intended to curtail "free speech" when it threatens to run amok and cause harm.

Internet anonymity has allowed cowards with no sense of personal accountability to run rampant and it's not a bad thing to remind people once in a while that yes, you CAN and SHOULD BE held responsible for your words.