Defamation Law - Discovery - Maryland Court of Appeals Sets out Process Required before Court May Compel Identification of Anonymous Internet Defendants

Harvard Law Review, February 2010 | Go to article overview

Defamation Law - Discovery - Maryland Court of Appeals Sets out Process Required before Court May Compel Identification of Anonymous Internet Defendants


DEFAMATION LAW--DISCOVERY--MARYLAND COURT OF APPEALS SETS OUT PROCESS REQUIRED BEFORE COURT MAY COMPEL IDENTIFICATION OF ANONYMOUS INTERNET DEFENDANTS.--Independent Newspapers, Inc. v. Brodie, 966 A.2d 432 (Md. 2009).

Anonymous speech has a long and important history in the United States. (1) The widespread availability of the internet and the common practice of using pseudonyms to post on websites and other internet fora have allowed anonymous speech to flourish in recent years. The frequency of anonymous postings has created an interesting problem in defamation jurisprudence as courts struggle to balance the First Amendment right to anonymous speech with the rights of plaintiffs who allege harm at the hands of anonymous posters. (2) Recently, in Independent Newspapers, Inc. v. Brodie, (3) the Maryland Court of Appeals adopted a five-step framework for trial courts to employ before issuing an order compelling the disclosure of identifying information about anonymous defendants in a defamation action. A plaintiff is first required to make a prima facie case for defamation and must then satisfy a balancing test that weighs the strength of her case against the defendant's right to anonymity. Yet First Amendment doctrine already includes balancing to protect the most important type of anonymous speech--speech regarding matters of public concern. Because the Brodie framework incorporates this protection in the prima facie case requirement, the final balancing test is unnecessary. The court's approach is also potentially overprotective of anonymous speech and may encourage more hurtful speech by decreasing accountability.

In May 2006, businessman Zebulon J. Brodie filed a defamation complaint in Maryland state court against Independent Newspapers, Inc. and three John Doe defendants known only by their usernames. (4) The complaint alleged that the John Doe defendants authored defamatory posts that were published on a web-based forum maintained by Independent Newspapers. (5) The posts commented negatively on local businesses maintained by Brodie and on his involvement in the development of a local farm property. (6) Independent Newspapers moved for dismissal or alternatively for summary judgment, (7) and it also requested a protective order that would shield the company from having to disclose the John Doe defendants' identities. (8) In November 2006, the trial court dismissed the claims against Independent Newspapers but denied the protective order. (9) On motion for reconsideration, Judge Ross noted that "the piety of the First Amendment requires ensuring that Plaintiff has stated a valid claim of defamation." (10) He then dismissed the cause of action related to the local farm property (11) but confirmed the order compelling disclosure of information that would identify the John Doe defendants who made negative comments about a Dunkin' Donuts owned by Brodie. (12) Brodie's attorney identified the authors of these comments as users employing the pseudonyms "RockyRacoonMD" and "Suze," (13) neither of whom had been named as a defendant in the initial complaint. (14) The final subpoena served to Independent Newspapers requested information that would identify these two posters as well as the three John Doe posters named in the initial suit, despite their lack of participation in the comments about the restaurant. (15) Independent Newspapers again moved for a protective order to preserve the anonymity of these posters, but the court denied the order in February 2008. (16)

The Maryland Court of Appeals reversed and remanded to the lower court with instructions to grant the protective order. (17) In a relatively short section of the majority opinion, Judge Battaglia (18) reasoned that while Brodie initially sued the three John Doe defendants, none had made the allegedly defamatory comments about Brodie's restaurant. Hence, no claim of defamation could lie against them. (19) Maryland's one-year statute of limitations for defamation claims barred a suit against the two posters who had actually made the actionable comments about Brodie's Dunkin' Donuts. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Defamation Law - Discovery - Maryland Court of Appeals Sets out Process Required before Court May Compel Identification of Anonymous Internet Defendants
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Author Advanced search

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.