Is Anonymity a right or a privilege?
- Thread starter Socrates the Greek
- Start date
Hmmm Interesting...but I doubt that the firefighters will win because that would start a chain reaction of invasion of privacy......
The only thing they could manage to get is the ip address from where the email came from and it could be an internet cafe, a library ect.
And then if google gives the IP, which I doubt...then they have to force the internet provider to give the name of the owner of that IP which is another court case:smile:
Your rights don't supercede the rights of anyone else... that's not new. Any time someone decides to charge you with a crime, your rights and privileges take a backseat to the legal process.
I post in Facebook and Myspace using my real name and my real picture. I would have no problem doing that here. I suspect as some have pointed out that anonymity encourages some members to post things that they would not normally say in person.
I hope that most people understand that unless they are using a program such as Anonymizer anything they say on the internet can be traced back to them. I always post with that in mind.
I hope that most people understand that unless they are using a program such as Anonymizer anything they say on the internet can be traced back to them. I always post with that in mind.
Sure if one has committed a crime, but in a case where an individual is making comments about facts that are true, that is not deformation, and a persons right to speak of real facts and truth with out fabricated should be protected, against legal action.
That would come to the discretion of the judge to review and decide if you broke the law and thus deserve to have your information subpoenaed I suppose. Some people's 'truth' is flat out deluded fabrication.
Yeah we know, cute little man with boyish looks. You'd might want to grow that hair a little more eh? :lol:
Let's not get into it but, ever image search "jack passion" on google? Who are those people? Talk about the anonymity behind those things! :lol:
if it is public knowledge and true fact, the judge is not going to disagree with real fact, living it to the judges discretion is a good thing, the sad part would be that you spoke about something of public knowledge and that is not a crime and should not be pursued in court.
Now as to deluded fabrication, true fact does not consist of deluded fabrication none of that. Hypothetically speaking, you spoke on foundation of truth which is public knowledge, which anyone suing you because you spoke of the truth would be wasting his or her time.
When people say scum Cons and gliberal wasted skin, it is not one person alone, many hold the same opinion, I can’t imagine the Government suing half of the country.
So where does freedom of speech begin and where does it stop, when we must consider the element of public knowledge and the right to that knowledge as free citizens.
As far as the Internet is concerned, there is no privacy.
Code 431.322.12 of the Internet Privacy Act signed by Bill Clinton in 1995 is fake.
And the Patriot Act is just about warrantless stuff...
It would fall under freedom of speech, and freedom of the press sort of laws. So, treat the Internet like a graphical telephone. Don't do anything over the Internet that you wouldn't do over the telephone.
Code 431.322.12 of the Internet Privacy Act signed by Bill Clinton in 1995 is fake.
And the Patriot Act is just about warrantless stuff...
It would fall under freedom of speech, and freedom of the press sort of laws. So, treat the Internet like a graphical telephone. Don't do anything over the Internet that you wouldn't do over the telephone.
Last edited: