Anonymity on the web and off: Is it a right?

[Amused]

I've been on the fence here. One side of me says anonymity fosters freedom of speech, therefore I support it. The other side says freedom comes with responsibility, and no matter what you say, you should be accountable for it therefore anonymity may be allowable, but should not be held as a "right." No matter how I read the Fourth Amendment, I cannot see any defined right to anonymity there.

What are your thoughts?

 

[DaveSimmons]

I agree it is not a right to be protected as free speech must be. But we do need better protection against punitive, frivolous lawsuits designed to stifle critics -- something like the right to a public defender in certain situations and/or stiff penalties for using suits as intimidation.

 

[gopunk]

i pretty much agree with you....

i lean towards the anonymity is not a right side though, even though the supreme court seems to think it is, because like you said, it isn't in the bill of rights and whatnot. dunno. something tells me that something larger needs reworking, that considering anonymity a right is akin to a hasty fix.

 

[AnthraX101]

Short answer: No.

Long answer: Kind of...

The real problem with anonimity is the problem of responsability. You must be accountable for your speech. The only time I would ever consider it a possible right, is in the case of speech regarding the government. Then, speech can be stiffled my them. The social stiffiling of speech is to be expected. It is the self limiting system in our society today. With true anonimity, then free speech is lost as a tool.

Armani

 

[ElFenix]

your assumption here (and one that i don't agree with) are that rights are enumerated in the bill of rights. since i don't agree with it i believe that anonymity should be chosen by whoever is doing the speaking. of course i weigh the opinions of those that say what they have to say in public, out in the open generally higher than those doing so anonymously. the tech is there to trace IPs and whatnot, so its hard to be anonymous, and on a private board like this one they can choose that no user can be truely anonymous, which i think is also within their rights. the only way to be completely anonymous is send a letter through the mail.

 

[piku]

Fantastic question. I never really gave much though to it, but since we really don?t expect to have or are given much anonymity anywhere else, what makes the web so different?

I guess a short answer would be that while you should have some degree of anonymity from other people if you wish, it shouldn?t be so anonymous that someone that actually needs and requires your info (police, for example) can?t get it if they had to.

 

[Fausto]

Here's an interesting example along these lines.

IIRC, the dealership got the forum to give them the ID of the guy ripping on their service. I also find it disgusting that the dealership sought damages from the website as well as the guy posting on it. IMO, this guy has every right to relay his experience with Jim Ellis motors and to have his identity remain anonymous because, as pointed out by DaveSimmons:

we do need better protection against punitive, frivolous lawsuits designed to stifle critics

Just my 0.02


Fausto

EDIT: Here is the thread over at VWvortex forums if anyone's interested.

 

[Moonbeam]

Whether I'm anonymous or not, I'm still the same. With freedom comes responsibility, you say. Well I don't see anything stopping me from being irresponsible in my freedom except my own inner sense of right and wrong. Now since the cost of violating my own sense of right and wrong would cost me the single most valuable thing worth having, self respect, I am a prisoner either way.

The people at the bank become confused when they ask for identification and I point to their big mirror and say, yup, that's me. Maybe you will understand.

 

[gopunk]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
your assumption here (and one that i don't agree with) are that rights are enumerated in the bill of rights. since i don't agree with it i believe that anonymity should be chosen by whoever is doing the speaking. of course i weigh the opinions of those that say what they have to say in public, out in the open generally higher than those doing so anonymously. the tech is there to trace IPs and whatnot, so its hard to be anonymous, and on a private board like this one they can choose that no user can be truely anonymous, which i think is also within their rights. the only way to be completely anonymous is send a letter through the mail.

i think it's still possible to be anonymous on the net. not that hard to find random computers to use. i could walk into any number of buildings here on campus, use them, and short of physically observing me, you would have no way of knowing i was the one on the computer.

 

[Kjazlaw]

usually people who go nuts over being anonymous are doing something shady or something they would be ashamed about. either that or they are paranoid schizophrenic.

 

[DaiShan]

You are correct annonymity fosters Freedom of Speech, which is paramount to anything that might come as a result of misuse of freedom of speech such as slander, and libelous comments. Whenever possible though people should be held accountable for their actions.

 

[gopunk]

Originally posted by: Kjazlaw
usually people who go nuts over being anonymous are doing something shady or something they would be ashamed about. either that or they are paranoid schizophrenic.

i wouldn't say usually... what about if you knew something illegal was going on but didn't want to reveal your identity? or just rant, like that guy on the internet did about the dealership?

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: Kjazlaw
usually people who go nuts over being anonymous are doing something shady or something they would be ashamed about. either that or they are paranoid schizophrenic.

I wholeheartedly disagree with that comment. Why must it be said that anyone who asks for privacy must have something to hide? Would you be ok with everyone knowing your sexual preference? Or how about if everyone knew where you sleep, and what you eat, what you like to do for fun? Where do you draw the line? Should any and all information on a person's life be public domain?

 

[gopunk]

Originally posted by: Fausto1
Here's an interesting example along these lines.

IIRC, the dealership got the forum to give them the ID of the guy ripping on their service. I also find it disgusting that the dealership sought damages from the website as well as the guy posting on it. IMO, this guy has every right to relay his experience with Jim Ellis motors and to have his identity remain anonymous because, as pointed out by DaveSimmons:

we do need better protection against punitive, frivolous lawsuits designed to stifle critics

Just my 0.02

here's my thoughts about that case. unless the BBS specifically guaranteed users anonymity, they can do whatever they want with that info. now, if i was the BBS, i would have told the dealership to piss off, but i digress. what's disgusting about this case is that you can actually be arrested for just ranting and warning people of a place. that's retarded, imo.

 

[Kjazlaw]

i wouldn't say usually... what about if you knew something illegal was going on but didn't want to reveal your identity? or just rant, like that guy on the internet did about the dealership?

i've seen something like that happen before, with an online pet store actually. in that case if he had posted anonymously, he probably would have lost credibility. that's actually a whole other issue with these sue-happy idiots... but i agree... there can't really be any absolutes when it comes to this issue. like when you report something illegal, etc etc.

I wholeheartedly disagree with that comment. Why must it be said that anyone who asks for privacy must have something to hide? Would you be ok with everyone knowing your sexual preference? Or how about if everyone knew where you sleep, and what you eat, what you like to do for fun? Where do you draw the line? Should any and all information on a person's life be public domain?

asking for privacy and "going nuts over anonymity" (as i alluded to) are completely different things. certainly people are afforded some privacy, like the things you bring up. (although if someone wanted to know those things about me i would be more frightened for me safety than anything.) it's just the line has to be drawn somewhere. you can't go through life being anonymous. where's the accountability?

 

[crystal]

Let look at it from a different view. If there is a system that can track wherever you are and what you do (not web related), would you want such a system in place?

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
your assumption here (and one that i don't agree with) are that rights are enumerated in the bill of rights.

Are you saying that that you don't beleive it's there are you don't believe in freedom of speech, assemply, property and gov't intrusion into religion (ie, rights)?

 

[vi edit]

I've got VERY mixed feelings on it.

The internet can be both very imaginary and very real. It can be used for fun, and it can be used for entertainment and legitmate purposes, but it can also be used for criminal purposes. The internet is growing more and more "real" by the day.

People do business over the internet.
People meet each other over the internet.
People check bank accounts and statements over the internet.

The more that these things are abused, I personally feel that anonymity is one step closer to being eliminated by businesses and politicians.

Priests have been busted for preying on minors over the internet, people have been arrested for comments made on chat rooms, trolls have been slapped with felonies for theft on the internet.

It's a moral dilema of which is more important - defending the perceived notion that we are anonymous, or taking steps(right or wrong) to eliminate the growing number of very real criminal issues on the 'net.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: Kjazlaw

i wouldn't say usually... what about if you knew something illegal was going on but didn't want to reveal your identity? or just rant, like that guy on the internet did about the dealership?

i've seen something like that happen before, with an online pet store actually. in that case if he had posted anonymously, he probably would have lost credibility. that's actually a whole other issue with these sue-happy idiots... but i agree... there can't really be any absolutes when it comes to this issue. like when you report something illegal, etc etc.

I wholeheartedly disagree with that comment. Why must it be said that anyone who asks for privacy must have something to hide? Would you be ok with everyone knowing your sexual preference? Or how about if everyone knew where you sleep, and what you eat, what you like to do for fun? Where do you draw the line? Should any and all information on a person's life be public domain?

asking for privacy and "going nuts over anonymity" (as i alluded to) are completely different things. certainly people are afforded some privacy, like the things you bring up. (although if someone wanted to know those things about me i would be more frightened for me safety than anything.) it's just the line has to be drawn somewhere. you can't go through life being anonymous. where's the accountability?

I disagree again. Privacy and anonymity are intertwined. As for your arguement about accountability, it is moot. Accountability has nothing to do with anonymity. They can only be vaguely linked if a person has committed a crime or something like that. You are however correct about the line being drawn, and that line should be drawn right where a person can still be anonymous if they choose.

 

[Moonbeam]

crystal, it's only a matter of time. As to whether I would want such a system, why of course. Imagine what life would be like of everybody were held responsible for their actions. A crime is committed, go to the computer and find out who was at the crime scene. Play back the imbeded camera view of a murder victom. Track every dollar bill. The possibilities are endless in putting a stop to crime that anonimity makes for. But that assumes that the data would be used responsibily. What's the chance of that? So it isn't a matter of the technology, but the implimentation, the oversight, and the democratic, open control over those factors. The answer to so many things is just decent people.

 

[gopunk]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
The answer to so many things is just decent people.

let us not forget it takes good parents for that

 

[bsobel]

here's my thoughts about that case. unless the BBS specifically guaranteed users anonymity, they can do whatever they want with that info. now, if i was the BBS, i would have told the dealership to piss off, but i digress. what's disgusting about this case is that you can actually be arrested for just ranting and warning people of a place. that's retarded, imo.

GoPunk, a couple notes about your post. First, 'if I was the BBS...', while the account was not clear, I wouldn't be suprised if the BBS was served with a supeona for the information. When I ran my BBS (a real BBS of old, not a webboard called a BBS by some writer), I got served a couple of times. At that point you legally need to comply with the request.

Second, 'you can actually be arrested'. Noone was arrested in this story, the Sherrif served the summons. If I sued you in small claims court, it's fairly likely the sherriff would served that summons also.

Bill

 

[DaiShan]

Priests have been busted for preying on minors over the internet, people have been arrested for comments made on chat rooms, trolls have been slapped with felonies for theft on the internet.

The difference there is that these people have made the move from the internet to commit crimes in real life.

 

[gopunk]

Originally posted by: bsobel

here's my thoughts about that case. unless the BBS specifically guaranteed users anonymity, they can do whatever they want with that info. now, if i was the BBS, i would have told the dealership to piss off, but i digress. what's disgusting about this case is that you can actually be arrested for just ranting and warning people of a place. that's retarded, imo.

GoPunk, a couple notes about your post. First, 'if I was the BBS...', while the account was not clear, I wouldn't be suprised if the BBS was served with a supeona for the information. When I ran my BBS (a real BBS of old, not a webboard called a BBS by some writer), I got served a couple of times. At that point you legally need to comply with the request.

Second, 'you can actually be arrested'. Noone was arrested in this story, the Sherrif served the summons. If I sued you in small claims court, it's fairly likely the sherriff would served that summons also.

Bill

ah i see, thanks for clearing that up.

i dunno, i just don't really like the ideal of libel. on one hand, i would be pissed if somebody just went around spreading lies about me. on the other, i don't want to have to worry about being sued every time i make a rant about a bad experience i had.

 

[Viper GTS]

Originally posted by: gopunk

Originally posted by: Fausto1
Here's an interesting example along these lines.

IIRC, the dealership got the forum to give them the ID of the guy ripping on their service. I also find it disgusting that the dealership sought damages from the website as well as the guy posting on it. IMO, this guy has every right to relay his experience with Jim Ellis motors and to have his identity remain anonymous because, as pointed out by DaveSimmons:

we do need better protection against punitive, frivolous lawsuits designed to stifle critics

Just my 0.02

here's my thoughts about that case. unless the BBS specifically guaranteed users anonymity, they can do whatever they want with that info. now, if i was the BBS, i would have told the dealership to piss off, but i digress. what's disgusting about this case is that you can actually be arrested for just ranting and warning people of a place. that's retarded, imo.

He wasn't arrested, he had a warrant served to appear in court.

My dad used to work for the sherriff's office serving papers, he did exactly this kind of stuff - but he did not have the authority (nor did he ever) arrest anyone.

[EDIT]Blah, a little late.

Got sidetracked by a call.[/EDIT]

Viper GTS