Sep 302010
 
 September 30, 2010  Court

Andy Serwin writes:

This post is the second in a series that examines First Amendment issues and privacy.  It examines several of the standards that courts have adopted when considering the identification of anonymous speakers on the Internet.

Other State Variants of Cahill

In Lassa v. Rongstad and The Valkyrie Group, LLC, 294 Wis.2d 187, 718 N.W.2d 673, No. 2004AP377, (July 13, 2006), a defamation action was brought against certain defendants, including anonymous defendants. This case applied Wisconsin law, as well as the Cahill test, to a degree, to determine if the membership in a political group could be disclosed prior to a motion to dismiss being granted. The Appellate Court noted that it would not strictly follow Cahill, because Wisconsin law, unlike Delaware law, required defamation to be pled with particularity, and therefore held, at least prospectively, that the court should decide a motion to dismiss prior to permitting the subpoena to proceed

Read more on Privacy & Security Source.

Related:  Part 1.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.