Internet trolls beware

[Kuya]

Hey, anonymous online bullies, you may not be as anonymous as you think. On Friday, a New York judge ordered Google to reveal the identity of the troll who called Carla Franklin a whore on YouTube. This development is, depending on how you view these things, likely either the end of privacy or a blow for accountability. Actually, it's both.

Back in August, Franklin discovered that videos she appeared in while studying at Columbia Business School had made it to the university's YouTube channel, where a commenter who went by "JoeBloom08," JimmyJean008" and "greyspector09" repeatedly called her a whore and posted unauthorized clips from a movie she appeared in during her modeling days.

While Cohen's and now Franklin's victories may serve as a warning to other anonymous critics, it can be hard for a hater to change spots. When the Skanks in NYC creator was revealed to be FIT student Rosemary Port, Port told The Daily News, "By going to the press, she defamed herself. I feel my right to privacy has been violated." She then announced her own plans to sue Google for breaching her privacy. Does Port have a point? After all, if you can't anonymously call someone, by name, "a psychotic, lying whore" on the Internet, what is the Internet good for anyway? But even for those who don't spend their days secretly trashing people online, the issues of privacy – and exactly how easily Google or Facebook or Twitter will roll over and reveal our personal information -- can be downright chilling.

The National Conference of State Legislatures notes, "Forty-seven states now have laws that explicitly include electronic forms of communication within stalking or harassment laws." Flaming isn't always just good clean fun. It can escalate into the personal, specific and, subsequently, illegal and unprotected. And then, bullies, you're on your own. As Franklin says, "The internet should not become an anonymous place for harassers to hide. Criminal behavior is not protected by the First Amendment."

I feel a bit conflicted. On the one hand, internet autism stricken misanthropes are an eyesore, but on the other, doesn't this violate a bit of the principles behind the internet? An anarchic medium where things not usually accepted by society may flourish and therefore produce alternative idea, and porn.

Is more regulation of the internet in this case a good thing?

http://www.salon.com/life/feature/20...google_lawsuit

[archibaldcrane]

To be fair, she was a whore.

[Eaglestrike]

To be fair, she was a whore.

Then was that guy really trolling her?

[Kuya]

Then was that guy really trolling her?

Trolling is intent!

[Max™]

Uh... who the fuck gives their real information to anyone these days?

If you're enough of a dickbag to happily spread your info around to sites like google and facebook, you're not smart enough to be a funny troll anyways.

[Tagus]

We should all have internet licenses, like driver licenses, that are required to go online so everything is recorded and documented and strategically strategized to the umpteenth dimension.

[Rhyis.]

You'd think a whore would be used of taking it on the chops.

[Silenka]

If you post videos of yourself online you are fair game for stupid comments and the kind of trolling this guy was doing. It's the internet, no one is going to hold your hand and make you feel safe after you post everything about yourself on your myspace.

More seriously, I think the law needs to keep its paws off the internet, no good can come of regulating it in any sense.

[Yabby]

Holy shit, the internet is going down soon!

[BerenTebogo]

Trolling is a art and this guy just wasn't a artist.

[LinktheDeme]

Trolling is a art and this guy just wasn't a artist.

http://leimobile.com/wp-content/uplo...its-a-trap.jpg

[BerenTebogo]

That poor cat

[Ksandra]

this guy

this guy

funny when you can tell people only glanced at an article.



Ontopic:

I am on the fence on this. You do see a lot of people getting emotionally distressed over what's said on the internet, and I don't know how far we should/can let the hidden veil go. Things like this always remind me of that whole situation with the girl that met a "guy" on myspace who turned out to be a classmate's mom who basically was the cause of the girl committing suicide. It does make me feel sometimes there needs to be a line drawn, but I don't know where or how.

[isladar]

the cause of the girl committing suicide

I would like to find out about this magical power that gives me the ability to make others act against their will.

[Acturus]

funny when you can tell people only glanced at an article.

There are no women on the internet.

Ontopic:

I am on the fence on this. You do see a lot of people getting emotionally distressed over what's said on the internet, and I don't know how far we should/can let the hidden veil go. Things like this always remind me of that whole situation with the girl that met a "guy" on myspace who turned out to be a classmate's mom who basically was the cause of the girl committing suicide. It does make me feel sometimes there needs to be a line drawn, but I don't know where or how.

Cyber-bullying panic buttons aside, the 6th Amendment to the US Constitution is interpretted as giving all citizens the right to face their accusers at trial. It could be argued that this is an extension of that 6th Amendment right.

[Ksandra]

I would like to find out about this magical power that gives me the ability to make others act against their will.

ya I understand, but I don't know if you remember the specifics of it. Basically the girl (call her Anne) didn't get along with her class mate (call her Susan). So Susan's mom decided to act like a guy on myspace, and acted so sweet and basically made Anne have a huge crush on her. Then after Anne completely trusted and had a huge crush on this "guy", Susan's mom then started calling Anne a whore and that she should kill herself, which she did.


Now, obviously your statement is true, Anne didn't need to listen or w/e. But if this had been a non-internet situation, say Susan's mom hired a boy to hang out with anne and do all the same things in conversation, then Anne's mom would have had recourse against Susan's mom. Instead Susan's mom got off with 0 punishment because there's no laws about it.

[Kuya]

ya I understand, but I don't know if you remember the specifics of it. Basically the girl (call her Anne) didn't get along with her class mate (call her Susan). So Susan's mom decided to act like a guy on myspace, and acted so sweet and basically made Anne have a huge crush on her. Then after Anne completely trusted and had a huge crush on this "guy", Susan's mom then started calling Anne a whore and that she should kill herself, which she did.


Now, obviously your statement is true, Anne didn't need to listen or w/e. But if this had been a non-internet situation, say Susan's mom hired a boy to hang out with anne and do all the same things in conversation, then Anne's mom would have had recourse against Susan's mom. Instead Susan's mom got off with 0 punishment because there's no laws about it.

Not to mention this is an adult emotionally abusing a minor in a very perverted way. Sadistic even.

[Serra]

I would like to find out about this magical power that gives me the ability to make others act against their will.

Yes she didn't physically force her, but when you create a persona just to get close to someone then use that intimacy to pick apart every possible flaw -- especially when it's a teenager with low self-esteem, there's an issue. I agree with Ksandra though in that it's hard to determine where to draw the line. Especially when the anonymity of the internet acts both ways and you don't know who you're making fun of. In that case, the mom did know, but there are times where that's not the case...

Let's just blame it on parents needing to do a better job of parenting, that seems like the easiest solution >.> <.<;

[BerenTebogo]

Ksandra stuff

This guy right here.

[Priran]

google is the man, don't be evil, etc