On March 13, 2008, Higher Balance Institute (HBI), which markets metaphysical products and education programs, filed a defamation lawsuit against the alternative news website Signs of the Times and its operators, the Quantum Future Group and Laura Knight-Jadczyk. Only Quantum Future Group has been served. HBI claims that employees of the Quantum Future Group posted defamatory statements about it on one of the website's forums. According to the complaint, these statements include allegedly false claims that HBI is a "front for pedophilia," that HBI is "conning the public," that meditation, as sold by HBI is an act of "falling into confluence with a psychopathic reality," and that HBI is a "cointelpro" organization. Cmplt. ¶23. (The Signs of the Times website uses the term "cointelpro" to refer to organizations that it claims perpetuate the ethos of a 1970s FBI counter intelligence program designed to quell domestic dissent.)

The complaint, filed in federal district court in Oregon, contains claims for defamation, false light invasion of privacy, and intentional interference with business relationships and prospective economic advantage. HBI seeks over $4 million in damages and an injunction. On April 25, 2008, Quantum Future Group moved to strike the complaint pursuant to Oregon's anti-SLAPP statute, Or. Rev. Stat. § 31.150.

Update:

4/25/2008 - Quantum Future Group filed motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted and for lack of personal jurisdiction.

5/19/2008 - Quantum Future School, Signs of the Times, and Knight-Jadezyk filed special motions to strike the complaint under Oregon's anti-SLAPP statute and joined Quantum Future Group's motion to strike. 

12/18/2008 - The district court granted the defendants' motions to strike the complaint under Oregon's anti-SLAPP statute. The court's decision relied in part on section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.

06/18/2009- The court granted in part the defendants' motion for attorney's fees. The court found the request of over $135,000 to be excessive, and so awarded $51,500.

On April 8, 2008, Perez Hilton sued fellow gossip-blogger Jonathan Jaxson for libel, slander, invasion of privacy, harassment, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Jaxson, the former publicist for the Backstreet Boys whose real name is Jonathan Wayne Lewandowski, operates a blog called JJ's Dirt that feeds the public's apparently unlimited hunger for celebrity gossip.

The complaint, which Hilton filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, alleges that Jaxson slandered him by stating that Hilton had solicited sexual favors from Jaxson in exchange for help promoting Jaxson’s website. The complaint specifically refers to a February 28 article in the New York Post in which Jaxson stated that Hilton encouraged him to send sex tapes of himself. "He would tell me he would give me stories for my blog," Jaxson told the Post. "He used me."

Hilton also claims that statements Jaxson made to ABC News, Popcrunch.com, and HollywoodCrap.com, were defamatory. According to ABC News.com and allegations in Hilton's complaint:

Jaxson sent ABCNEWS.com copies of several instant message conversations he claims he had online with Lavandeira. The conversations appear to show Lavandeira requesting sex videos from Jaxson, apparently coaching him on who to send the tapes to and also contains several nude shots of Jaxson. ABCNEWS.com has not been able to independently verify the authenticity of the instant message conversations. . . .

"[Lavandeira] was using me as his personal porn service," said Jaxson, who admitted to sending several sex tapes and photographs featuring himself to Lavandeira on the condition that he would alert him to breaking celebrity news. "I felt manipulated."

Hilton states in his complaint that there was no agreement to exchange sex for his helping publicize Jaxson's blog.

Adding to the emotional nature of the dispute, Jaxson published Hilton's personal phone number on his blog earlier this week and told his readers that Perez "has hurt me and millions of others, because of this I think you should call him and let him know how you feel."

Under California's court rules, Jaxson has 30 days to answer the complaint.

Update:

5/9/2008 - Jaxson gave notice of the case's removal to the United States District Court, Central District of California.

6/2/2008 - Jaxson answered Hilton's complaint.

9/18/2008 - The parties entered into a written settlement agreement. (See exhibit A).

7/15/2009 - Jaxson filed a lawsuit against Hilton, alleged that he violated the 9/18/2008 settlement agreement. 

In May 2003, Dana Kono sued Lawrence and Carole Meeker in Iowa state court for defamation, false light invasion of privacy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. After an acrimonious business dispute between the Meekers and Kono over a botched exchange of antique mechanical devices, the Meekers published a page on their website called the "Dana Kono Watch page." According to the Court of Appeals decision in the litigation, the Meekers' webpage stated that Kono was an "admitted liar," said that Kono "has a problem with the truth, with facts, and it seems with alcohol," and made other statements accusing Kono of being a disreputable person. The Meekers also posted excerpts from their email communications with Kono.

Kono sued, arguing that the statements on the Meekers' site were false and defamatory. The case went to trial, and the jury awarded Kono $500,000, including $150,000 for defamation, $50,000 for invasion of privacy, $50,000 for intentional infliction of emotional distress, and $125,000 in punitive damages. The Meekers appealed, and the Court of Appeals of Iowa affirmed the jury verdict on all counts.

In July 2006, Dr. James Floyd sued South Carolina television station WBTW-TV and its parent company for defamation in South Carolina state court. The dispute revolved around a March 1, 2006 WBTW-TV report on local doctors suspended from the practice of medicine for various forms of misconduct. The report directed viewers to WBTW's website, which contained a list of suspended doctors and the reasons for their suspensions. According to Dr. Floyd's complaint and other court papers, the website indicated that Floyd's license had been suspended because of his use of crack cocaine when in fact it had been suspended due to alcohol-related problems.

WBTW removed the case to federal court in South Carolina and moved for summary judgment, arguing that the statement on the website was substantially true and that the reporter who posted it lacked "common law malice," which requires that the publication be motivated by hatred, ill will, or desire to injure. The Court denied WBTW's motion, ruling that the issues raised by the television station were questions of fact for the jury to decide.

On January 10, 2008, the trial in the case began. The parties settled on the same day, before it concluded.

Jimmie Cokinos, a former Jefferson County Commissioner, petitioned a Texas state court for permission to issue a subpoena to Time Warner Cable seeking the identity of a subscriber. The subscriber, using the pseudonym "recall+carl01," had sent a series of emails to voters at the time Cokinos was (unsuccessfully) seeking re-election. The emails criticized Cokinos and other public officials for allegedly making wasteful public expenditures and satirized them by placing photographs of their heads on photographs of characters from "Hogan's Heroes" and "Star Wars." In his petition, Cokinos alleged that the emails were defamatory and violated the Texas Election Code.

When Time Warner notified its subscriber of the subpoena, the pseudonymous emailer moved to quash the subpoena with the help of the Public Citizen Litigation Group. Doe argued that the First Amendment protected his/her right to speak anonymously and that the emails contained legitimate criticism, not defamatory statements. The court agreed and granted the motion to quash.

Is your life really this boring and meaningless that you would spend the hours necessary to create such a website?

As Coach Karl’s counsel I am putting you on notice that I will sue you into bankruptcy should you cross the boundaries of permissible speech.

Gameology, a video-game-review site, posted some criticisms of "Left Behind: Eternal Forces," a Christian-themed video game. Gameology's posts took issue with the game's atmosphere of faith-based violence and criticized its treatment of women and minorities. Several other blogs and forums, including Radical Congruency, Raving Atheists, Earthside, and Public Theologian, posted similar criticisms. Some of these sites criticized Left Behind Games, Inc., which created the game, and noted the company's financial troubles.

Left Behind Games posted two responses to the criticisms via comments at Gameology, calling the criticisms "misleading." The company later sent a cease-and-desist letter to Gameology through its legal advisor Gordon D. Katz, alleging that the criticisms were false and misleading. The letter threatened suit if any false and misleading material is not removed.

Left Behind Games sent similar letters to the aforementioned blogs and forums. None of the letters describe specific statements that are allegedly false and misleading.

As of 03/02/2008, only Earthside has chosen to remove the disputed content, replacing it with a copy of the threat letter and a short explanatory note. Gameology and the remaining sites thus far have not elected not to remove the criticisms.

Naji A. Alkateeb and Deanna R. Wilson-Alkateeb filed a "John Doe" lawsuit in federal district court in New York in May 2005. According to court documents, several anonymous Internet users(using Google and Hushmail email addresses) allegedly postedinsulting comments, threats, and personal information related to theAlkateebs on the forum sections of two websites: TheKnot.com and Photobucket.com. Certain unknown defendants also allegedly sent defamatory emails to third parties, including the plaintiffs' extended family. The Alkateebs sued for defamation, invasion of privacy (through publication of private facts), and intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress.

After filing suit, the Alkateebs subpoeanaed The Knot, Photobucket, Google, and Hushmail for information that would reveal the identities of the anonymous posters. Three anonymous defendants received notice of the subpoena and moved to quash, and Public Citizen filed an amicus brief, in which it argued that the First Amendment protected the defendants' right to speak anonymously. Public Citizen also argued that the plaintiffs had not shown that jurisdiction was proper either in federal court or in New York. Apparently the court allowed some of the subpoenas to issue.

The Alkateebs filed an amended complaint in September 2005, in which they named the Knot, Inc. and four individuals as defendants. On Jan 31, 2006, the Alkateebs filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss the complaint without prejudice. The court granted the motion as to all defendants except the defendants who had already moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. When the plaintiffs did not respond within thirty days to the motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, the court dismissed the lawsuit against the final three defendants with prejudice.