Oct 072010
 
 October 7, 2010  Court, Online

Julian A. Biggs analyzes legal opinions concerning standards applied in various cases involving unmasking anonymous commenters on the web.  He writes, in part, about Quixtar:

The Court of Appeals’ opinion provides valuable guidance to trail level courts as to which test should apply in any particular case.

In particular, it asserted two important governing principles: that the major driver in that choice should be the nature of the anonymous speech at issue; and that anonymity warrants far less First Amendment protection — and a less demanding test for the plaintiff — when it covers commercial rather than non-commercial speech. (See Quixtar at *6, citing Perry v. Schwarzenegger, 591 F.3d 1147, 1160-61 (9th Cir.2010).)

Read his entire article on Law.com.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.