Wild West of Internet Media – Two Google Lawsuits Set Precedence in 2009

2009 was a year for exploring the Wild West of media and news. There has been a wide range of social discovery with the development of citizen journalism and a decline of traditional news media. Many reports from private citizens have been a useful tool. However, it has also become the stage to damage and harass.

This year exposed two controversial blogging lawsuits in the cyber world, setting legal precedence for possibly years to come.

The two distinguishable legal cases involving blogging were Liskula Cohen v. Skanks of New York and the other is Dr. Cem Kinay v. TCI Journal.

Comparing the Skanks case with the TCI Journal Case is interesting. The similarities are a given, it’s the distinguishing facts that make these cases remarkable.

Both lawsuits brought by the Plaintiffs in each case respectively sought to reveal the individual identities from the ip addresses of the bloggers making alleged abusive and harassing remarks by the Defendants.

In the Skanks case, fashion designer Rosemary Port created a Google webpage for her sole contributions to attack the character of New York model Liskula Cohen. Besides using vulgar language to name-call Cohen, language was used causing Cohen to feel vulnerable and afraid from the notion of being attacked in cyber world. Cohen sued Google to reveal the name of the blogger. The New York State Supreme Court indeed issued a subpoena requiring Google to reveal the identity of the blogger, Port. Once Cohen discovered the identity of the attacker, she dropped her lawsuit and opted to settle the matter between the two former friends in a more private forum. Although, Port is reportedly suing Google for violating her privacy.

The second case of note was the case of Dr. Cem Kinay v. TCI Journal, a case that I have been personally following since its inception in June 2009.

The case of TCI Journal certainly has more international intrigue. It originates from Turks and Caicos Islands in the Caribbean. Following a government corruption enquiry by the UK, a document entitled Commission of Enquiry Report was published naming resort developer and magnate Dr. Cem Kinay as a person questioned in the government corruption (although no charges have been brought), along with several other developers. Though a judge had their names stricken from the enquiry report, as the developers were found to have been acting under the color of authority when building their resorts, a website called TCI Journal continued to make accusations against the developers, including Dr. Kinay.

TCI Journal, labeled a propaganda website, is run by the islands’ political opposition party and reportedly had several conflicts of interest to report such accusations. In addition to attacking Dr. Kinay’s character, TCI Journal made repeated accusations against Dr. Kinay’s business plan to Dr. Kinay’s loan funding and development partners.

Shaun Malcolm, the editor of the site, calling himself a forensic accountant, made damaging allegations about the resort development’s business plan and financing. It is alleged in Dr. Kinay’s lawsuit that Shaun Malcolm through TCI Journal wrote letters to Kinay’s international investors including Trinidad and Tobago Trust, who were financing the high-end resort. Hiding behind anonymous names, TCI Journal continued its sustained attacks against Dr. Kinay and other developers, all tolled at least 12 major resort developers of Turks and Caicos. TCI Journal furthermore hacked into the court-ordered stricken (redacted) enquiry report listing the developers’ names and caused it to be published on Wikileaks in violation of the order enjoining publication of the redacted text (a site dedicated to publishing leaked documents).

It turns out that the political opposition party behind TCI Journal has a newly announced platform of ridding the islands of developers who are taking Belongers (islanders) Crown Land and failing to hire more islanders for the construction projects. http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/4898504-another-opposition-political-party-threatens-turks-and-caicos

Dr. Kinay’s funding was lost in September 2009 amidst accusations by TCI Journal to the construction loan financiers and investors. TCI Journal made repeated accusations that Dr. Kinay was taking the funding and failing to build the resort where among others Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta Jones had purchased private villas. Subsequent reports from the receiver in the case revealed that this was untrue and that the development is wholly marketable with progress enough to find solid investors to complete the project, however since the development is in receivership, it will likely be without Dr. Kinay.

Dr. Kinay sued TCI Journal to reveal the names of the individuals behind the anonymous attacks. The lawsuit is pending as well as an alleged counter-suit.

Many legal analysts and journalists have weighed in on the two cases, Skanks and TCI Journal. On the one hand, many defend the anonymous bloggers, crying out for protection of the First Amendment rights as well as “truth” as a defense to defamation. The problem with using truth as a defense is how you prove whether or not someone is a skank or even what a skank is for that matter. Furthermore, how exactly would the Plaintiff in the Skanks case establish monetary damages for being called a skank? Is the Plaintiff legally injured by the comment, skank?

On the other hand, much of the public is turning its back on the First Amendment defense contending that using the internet as an anonymous tool to harass, is akin to stealing one’s identity, calling for internet restrictions to prevent harassment and financial damage.

Many legal analysts also contend that there is no comparison between The Skanks in New York case and the TCI Journal case. The similarities in the two cases are that the bloggers were both accused of making anonymous verbal attacks on persons; suits were brought, and subpoenas were issued requiring Google to turn over the identities of the bloggers. The similarities pretty much end there.

Is the internet designed to be anonymous? Many experts agree that the internet does not come with any First Amendment guarantees, especially for speech that is not otherwise protected. Also, it is an error to hide behind the defamation defense of “truth”, truth is subjective, as we learned in the case of Skanks.

When high profile individuals or businesses are targeted using the internet, using anonymity as a tool and blogs as their weapon, damage is accrued. Due to lack of proper internet security regulations, many victims simply give up. However, these victims lose face professionally and socially. The two legal cases aforementioned may actually help to establish a legal precedence for cyber harassment victims.

Until now, it has been impossible to discover who is attacking. Although it is not a given that a legal order to expose the targeter will be issued upon bringing suit, many courts have seen the necessity of changing the standards and have issued subpoenas upon good cause.

The latest trend in the legal system is that it is appropriate to be prepared to have your identity revealed. Making public comments over the internet that you cannot prove is a risk. Judith Donath, fellow at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University says, “You can claim anonymity, but there is a range of things that a judge will use to determine whether you have used your anonymity responsibly.”

Posted by WNV Headline News on January 5, 2010. Filed under economy,Money,Opinion Editorial,US Business News,WorldNewsVine. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.