Anonymity
Glass v. Doe d/b/a pogowasright.org
Salon Professional Academy v. Blacconiere
Vinogradov v. Bozeman Daily Chronicle
Park West Galleries v. Fine Art Registry
Guardian Civic League v. Philadelphia Police Department
Wiseman v. Does 1-25
Gorman v. Meale
Brandjacking on Social Networks: Twitter, Malicious Ghost Writing, and Corporate Sabotage
Town of Secaucus v. NJ.com
Employee Privacy and Social Networks: The Case for a New Don’t Ask Don’t Tell
News Websites in Texas and Kentucky Invoke Shield Laws for Online Commenters
Tanner Friedman v. Doe
Skutt Catholic High School v. Does
Bible & Gospel Trust v. Twinam
Blixseth v. Bresnan Communications
Berkman's Cyberlaw Clinic Submits Amicus Brief in Case Involving Prior Restraint and Reporter's Privilege
HIMSS v. PedSource
Target Corp. v. Doe
Remove Your Content v. Does
Pages
![Subscribe to RSS - Anonymity](https://www.dmlp.org/misc/feed.png)
Description:
Jane Doe, an anonymous blogger and author of the website Pogo Was Right: Privacy News from Around the World, filed suit in the Central District of California against Lillian Glass, Ph.D. The lawsuit seeks a declaratory judgment that (1) Doe is protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act from liability for postings made by anonymous third parties in the website's forums, and (2) that certain comments made by Doe on the blog do not defame Dr. Glass.
The case arises from a series of posts by Doe on the Pogo Was Right website relating to the mental health problems experienced by Britney Spears and the resulting media coverage. Dr. Glass, a "body language expert," had appeared on CNN's Showbiz Tonight and on CNN's Primetime Live with Erica Hill to discuss Ms. Spears' behavior and to offer a potential diagnosis of Ms. Spears as suffering from Multiple Personality Disorder. In response, Doe authored a series of posts criticizing Dr. Glass' comments and raising concerns about Ms. Spears' privacy and patient confidentiality.
On June 18, 2009, an attorney for Dr. Glass wrote to Doe, asserting that certain comments by Doe and an anonymous forum poster "violated the privacy rights and other rights" of Dr. Glass; were "false and defamatory in nature, and [were] designed to embarrass and hold my client up to ridicule"; and "incited persons with such propensities and have called for Dr. Glass' death." (The latter in reference to the following from one of Doe's posts: "'Dr. Phil' catches some flak and dishes some out A complaint filed about Dr. Phil -- but is it wellfounded? People who live in Glass psychology houses shouldn't throw stones. They should be stoned. Dr.
Lillian Glass backpedals, but is it too little, too late?") The letter demanded that Doe remove all references to Dr. Glass from her posts.
Dr. Glass' attorney subsequently sent an email once again threatening to sue if Doe did not remove the references to Dr. Glass from the webiste. The email also stated: "I should also mention to you that if a suit is filed against you, then there will be a public record of your identity and of your capacity as the blogger of this 'pogowasright.org' and other websites. Since you have gone to such great lengths to hide your identity improperly, I think this should also be a concern of yours." Doe filed the complaint for a declaratory judgment ten days after receipt of this email.