AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION TIME

So this is one of those things that, like particularly violent anal sex, I'm kinda torn over.

From Wired, via ar901:

     ""Women named Jill and Hillary should be raped."
    
     Those are the words of "AK-47" -- a poster to the college-admissions web forum AutoAdmit.com. AK-47 was one of a handful of students heaping misogynist scorn on women attending the nations' top law schools in 2007, in posts so vile they spurred a national debate on the limits of online anonymity, and an unprecedented federal lawsuit aimed at unmasking and punishing the posters.
     
     Now lawyers for two female Yale Law School students have ascertained AK-47's real identity, along with the identities of other AutoAdmit posters, who all now face the likely publication of their names in court records -- potentially marking a death sentence for the comment trolls' budding legal careers even before the case has gone to trial."

Proper administration of the First Amendment online can be a precarious thing, to say the least.

Give the article a read and let me know what you think.

EDIT: neogrammarian had provided AN EXCELLENT BIT OF INSIDE INFO ON THE CASE

Okay, now that you've read it we'll get into discussion.

I'm a huge proponent of the First Amendment, but it took me several reads to get to what I really think about this case. If one were to write "I think I will sodomize *name here*. Repeatedly" on a piece of paper and then tape it up somewhere public, that's against the law and they have every right to do what they can to find out who posted it. As such, I think that it's well and good to find out who posted that and apply the same law to them.

Therefore, I think that, for the person threatening rape, legal action = totally appropriate.

The question for me is where you draw that line between "threat" and "stupid". Do I think the person who said "She has herpes" should be nabbed and prosecuted? No. Sure, it's kinda libel, but it's...I don't know, to me it doesn't amount to shouting fire in a crowded theatre, nor does it constitute a direct threat.

The problem with my decision there, however, is will that comment's online presence affect her life negatively in the future, be it in trying to start a relationship or trying to get a job? That's prosecutable libel. Will anybody really see it and think that, though? There's legal precedent for that, too, that a comment is done in such a way that it's not a...dunno, it's not plausible or credible.

We're living in a very odd time, and we're not prepared for it legally. We can't attack all of these cases with a hammer, because so many of these cases are so delicately poised in regards to the law that they require a scapel.

Problem is, we don't know where we're supposed to start cutting.

Thoughts?

REMINDER: Keep your discussions / arguments civil or risk having them frozen / deleted. Yep, that's me censoring you. :)

b

(no subject)