Judge Orders Google to Identify 'Skanks' Blogger

I think it's more than just calling someone a name on the internet, it's creating, running and supervisiing an entire site solely dedicated to insulting and defaming this one particular person. If this had not been stopped this would have opened the floodgate for tens of thousands of other people doing the same exact thing to every known person out there. Anyone, ANYONE, who didn't like a person could start a website or a blog about someone and write anything they wished and it would have been considered "legal". Just imagine if that person you went to school with that didn't like you, the fellow co-worker, or heaven forbid - the ex spouse or boyfriend could do the same thing! If this hadn't been stopped this could have turned into one of the biggest internet nightmares yet to come. I'm glad the judge forced Google to hand over the name. When you own a company, you have a certain moral, legal, and ethical obligation to serve society in a proper manner. Having a site on the internet isn't like going to confession with a priest, there's no vow of confidentality. I don't see where these internet providers get off saying they have to protect idiots, slimeballs and buttheads out there. No way folks, your first job is to protect the public and if giving out your contact info is part of that, then that's what you do. I also don't think she should back down if an apology is given, that defeats the whole purpose of taking responsibility for their actions. Go ahead with the lawsuit so it's on the books and make them do community service of some such thing, that's what I would do. Physical labor often fixes people much more than money man times.

I'm glad she got called out on this. People think that behind their computer they can say whatever they want about whoever they want, and to go so far as to post pictures of her is an invasion of her privacy. Free speech is great and all, but people need to get some common decency.

Funny how the "social networking" sites have changed "freedom of speech". Is it really freedom of speech to write indelible comments on the internet that persist on some spinning hard drive or tape ad infinatum. Isn't that like writing it in a book for publication. Pre-internet, hard drives, backup tapes you called someone a "skank" or whatever word you want to use in a conversation with someone and it died right there. Maybe you even did it to the person's face and it likely died with a flourish of words, or maybe even at worst some "hairpulling." Again it died right there - that is freedom of speech. I really am a bit confused at the interpretation. Someone can help here. Is writing it down on "paper" or an indelible source, e.g. internet blog, social-networking site, or lets say the front page of a newspaper different ? I think so. The old saying of "stick and stone will break my bones, but words will never hurt me" comes to mind. The question is then is it "spoken" words or "written" words. I suppose a constitutional scholar will have to answer that and that is not me.

Ah Peter my boy, I see that you must be one of the new regime's minions. And your proof of all of what you say is where. Especially the staggering numbers of 1,000,000 Iraquis. Nevermind that Sadaam mass-executed his OWN people. Tortures, are you serious? You mind numbing, believe everything the LIBERAL news media feeds you peop are truly unbelieveable. What's the matter Petey, can't think for yourself. While I'm at it, I suppose the eaves-dropping you refer to is the Patriot Act. You do not what it was for, don't you. My question to you then is this. How had your life changed since is was enacted? Hauled to court, been to jail. Didn't think so. BTW, what a stupid segway to get to your invalid points. Freedom of speech. Peter, peter why don't you just go back to bed with your blanky and have a few nice dreams. The dreamscape you're now involved in, doesn't resonate

Obviously she cares! Why waste YOUR energy ranting and raving.........if you do not care so much......use it for something constructive and positive. You might find yourself happier.

One person's rights end where another person's rights begin. No individual has the right to stalk and/or libel another, especially using photos. This is basically assault on a person's character. Cyber-bullying has really gotten out of hand, including in our schools. I hope Liskula's case stands, it might make the perpetrators think twice next time.

Nothing happened to freedom of speech. This is called being responsible after you shoot your mouth off. Think before you speak, because if I put my foot up your ass after you get done, a jury will find in my favor every time. What she is doing is covered under the same constitutional amendment... which isn't "freedom of speech," it's "freedom of expression." She's expressing how she feels about what this chickensh!t coattail riding wannabe celebrity whore wrote about her. Pretty simple when you get right down to it.

You just made the point of the story. Too much attention is given to people who make pointless, baseless inflamatory statement about others just to get attention or just to inflict harm for some perceived wrong. In an era of "reality" shows and blogs which give people the opportunity to make gobs of money for mundane acts that gain an eyeblink of the public's attention, the concept of common courtesy is rapidly disapearing, and you're statement typifies that trend.

i was sued for defamation for my blog on myspace, over a personal family relationship...but the person i blogged about , is quasi famous in a very small circle, and i only had less than 300 people even read my blog...

Why is it that when a nasty person gets caught he/she is sometimes forgiven if he/she apoligizes? If the nasty person hadn't been caught they would still be out there hurting others and that is not nice.
Crooks, morons and idiots hurt folks and opt out of punishment by simply saying 'I'm sorry?' NO WAY FOOLS. I hope the lady sues you! I hope the world is told who you are, where you live so that you will be forever embarrased and have to be financially responsible for you own actions.
Forget about rights and all - when you are a low life moron you need to be disgraced in public.
Many people love to hide behind the Internets cloke and spew out all sorts of nasty stuff about just about anyone they don't like. This has to stop!!!

Go ahead and say or write anything you would like to of me, if it makes your day I'm all for it. I don't care, I'm very content with myself and who I am. But, and I don't care what some other woman wrote of anyother woman, she needs to grow up and get a life. If your wittle feelings are hurt by some words on a computer, you got some serious problems. Run home to mommy and tell her your feelings are hurt and she might wipe away the tears. And if the pictures are so personal, how did the other woman get them? If they are out there then it's open to all. With kids getting stolen from their parents everyday, the wars going on, people losing both jobs and homes, and this so called "woman" is crying in her milk that someone said something bad of her? Most could only wish thats the worse thing to happen to them today. What a candy azz, get my way all the time person, oh, I better be quiet or I might get sued or in big twouble. Geez, what crap. How old are you???

You just made the point of the story. Too much attention is given to
people who make pointless, baseless inflamatory statement about
others just to get attention or just to inflict harm for some
perceived wrong. In an era of "reality" shows and blogs which give
people the opportunity to make gobs of money for mundane acts that
gain an eyeblink of the public's attention, the concept of common
courtesy is rapidly disapearing, and your statement typifies that
trend.

ANYONE who creates a blog or website specifically to demean , humiliate or cruelly expose someone, should be revealed themselves and taken to court. No matter what you think of someone, you shouldn't (and DON'T have the right) to ruin their life. This wasn't some message board where the idea is to express one's opinion on the matter at hand, this was a site created to ruin a life. I believe absolutely in freedom of speech and the freedom to express one's self freely without harm coming to them, but this wasn't that type of source. *I also believe that this ruling from the judge should stand for any of us (not just a celebrity or model) if someone does this type of thing to us. We ALL have the right to privacy and to work and live peaceably.

I thought it was "freedom of speech," not freedom to write offensive comments that the writer is too ashamed to claim as their own.

While our first Amendment rights do grant us the freedom of speech, we must show some measure of responsibilty with that freedom. Disagreeing with an ideal, concept or political agenda is one thing- but personal attacks on a targeted person are another. I believe thats called "slander." Yes we can speak out for or against what we believe in- but this is something different.

if she's a skank then she's a skank!! what happened to freedom of speech? i never heard of this case? apparently they are right she's looking for publicity, who the heck is she?
*********************Seems Karen Kelly needs to learn what freedom of speech is all about. It DOES NOT give you the right to defame someone, Freedom of speech gives you the right to speak out about your country, or to present your artform. You can't arbitrarily walk around calling people skanks. Please learn your stuff before spouting off.