Suit called test of online right to free speech
By Ross Kerber, Globe Staff, 5/12/2000
Civil liberties groups backed a lawsuit filed yesterday against Internet portal Yahoo Inc., in a case that may become a key test of free-speech rights online.
Yahoo runs some of the most popular Internet message boards devoted to chat about publicly traded stocks. The messages have prompted hundreds of legal complaints from companies charging defamation or that anonymous authors have disclosed trade secrets online.
In these cases Yahoo, of Santa Clara, Calif., has routinely identified its users in response to subpoenas.
But critics including the American Civil Liberties Union say most of the suits are frivolous and aimed at quashing dissent. They say Yahoo should do more to protect the privacy of its user base, or at least admit how fragile online anonymity has become.
Now these critics believe they have a test case, filed yesterday in federal district court in Los Angeles by an Ohio man who says he was fired after being identified as the author of critical messages about his bosses at the AnswerThink Consulting Group of Miami.
The former employee, who doesn't identify himself in his suit, seeks damages of more than $75,000. Another aim is to prod Yahoo to notify users when their identities are being sought, said plaintiff's attorney, Megan Gray, and give them a chance to respond.
''Because any lawyer can issue subpoenas without a judge's approval or a court hearing, Yahoo users are more vulnerable to corporate bullying tactics,'' said Gray, of the Baker & Hostetler law firm in Los Angeles.
The suit is supported by the ACLU and the Electronic Privacy Information Center, which say it is the first time Yahoo has been sued over its disclosure policies.
The case is only the the latest obstacle for Yahoo as it tries to develop standards for its online communities, full of notoriously anarchic chatter. Last fall, Yahoo executives admitted to removing controversial material posted on the chat boards, sometimes even censoring messages before subjects complained.
In March, in a filing to the Securities & Exchange Commission, Yahoo also disclosed a review by the Federal Trade Commission ''to determine whether we have complied with applicable FTC consumer protection regulations.''
A Yahoo spokeswoman yesterday declined to comment on the lawsuit or on the FTC's actions, except to note the disclaimers Yahoo makes in its terms of service statements to users.
These state that ''Yahoo is committed to safeguarding your privacy online'' but also that Yahoo may turn over data in cases ''when we believe in good faith that the law requires it.''
In contrast, Yahoo rivals America Online and Microsoft say they notify their users when an identity is sought in civil suits, giving users the chance to try to block frivolous demands for their identities. Unlike those companies, Yahoo's services are free and the company has indicated users shouldn't expect the same privacy protections.
The questions of just how much protection to afford anonymous speech aren't new. But in the past they often related to political matters such as the Federalist Papers, published unsigned in 1787.
The content now in dispute is hardly as weighty. In the Los Angeles case, the plaintiff identifies himself only as ''John Doe'' and chose the Yahoo screen name of ''Aquacool 2000'' after a water-cooler in his office, Gray said.
According to Gray and others, Aquacool wrote 30 messages to the Yahoo message board devoted to AnswerThink over a five-month period, about half of which were critical of the company. For instance, Aquacool wrote that one of AnswerThink's managers ''is so dull that a 5-watt bulb gives him a run for the money,'' according to the lawsuit.
In response, AnswerThink filed a defamation lawsuit against Aquacool and several other defendants in federal court in Miami, and issued subpoenas to Yahoo seeking to learn the real identity of authors; Gray said Yahoo gave her a copy of the subpoena of Aquacool's identity, with which it complied.
AnswerThink then filed a second suit against Aquacool specifically, fired him and denied him compensation, according to the complaint.
Aquacool concedes his messages contained criticism and ridicule of AnswerThink's management, but says they weren't defamatory. By turning over his identity to AnswerThink, Yahoo violated his privacy and First Amendment rights.
At the least, the suit says, Yahoo should have notified him when it received the subpoena. Instead, the suit says, Yahoo has ''consciously ignored such complaints for the sole purpose of reaping profits for itself and placating the anger of companies that are the subject of message-board criticism.''
In a statement, AnswerThink said that its actions ''were taken to protect the company and its shareholders from a former employee who was divulging confidential information on the Internet.
AnswerThink executives did not say just what information was confidential.
This story ran on page A01 of the Boston Globe on 5/12/2000.
¸ Copyright 2000 Globe Newspaper Company.
boston.com
Thanks to oldirtybastard on the A@P thread for noting this news item
( #reply-13703109 ) |
