Doe, Roe Poe: Oh Know!

How are these for names, John Doe, Jane Roe, Richard Poe and Sally Yoe? Pick one that peaks your fancy, that is if you are one of over a million Canadians who are interactive on the Internet. Interactive here refers to those, like me, who converse on the Internet with people on many topics. It could be discussing a horrid movie on the Internet Movie Database website (IMDB.com) that you spent good money renting, or it could be responding to a story posted on CBC's website. Or you could be posting your opinion in a health care news forum responding to a new snake-oil product that just does not work.

Yes, many Canadians log onto these types of websites and use anonymous monikers like BigTrucker49 or SweetSixteen72. This anonymity tends to allow someone to express themselves freely, and for many get a sense that they can say anything without getting their face slapped or knuckles rapped. Many are lulled into a false sense of security when responding to a news story from a well known television station or newspaper. After-all, they are agreeing with something that has been published by the media, who should have the professionalism to be careful and not defame anyone.

The names John Doe, Jane Roe, Richard Poe and Sally Yoe are common names attributed to ‘yet to be identified’ defendants on a Writ of Summon when one files a lawsuit.

In Canada, there are two interesting cases that have been brought to our attention this month which could set a new precedent in law. In each one, additional defendants have been drawn in from those who leave seemingly innocent comments on blogs, news articles and opinion pieces.

The first one comes to us from Nova Scotia where a judge has ordered a newspaper and Google Inc. to provide details on the identity of people who posted anonymous comments about Halifax's top firefighters. Sally Roe in this instance posted critical comments about these firefighters while responding to news stories on a discussion forum over issues of racism. It would be fair to say that the newspaper who published the stories may be in court in the future and those who responded to the stories may not be able to hide behind a name something like FireStalker22.

Then in Vancouver a lawsuit was filed in the British Columbia Supreme Court against a national newspaper from Toronto, where a reporter wrote four opinion pieces and allegedly made libelous comments defaming a well-known and respected Canadian climatologist. The court document claims that the reporter attributed statements to the scientist that was “grossly irresponsible falsehoods.” In this case, not only is the newspaper reporter, editor and publisher named as defendants, but the Writ makes room for a John Doe, Jane Roe, Richard Poe and Sally Yoe. Four anonymous comment-posters that responded to the reporter's stories.

At first glance one could say, “Good Luck” in locating the casual Internet user that chimed-up and supported the opinions of the defendants. Because everyone knows that if you're chatting up with a SexyGirl32 on the Internet at the other end of the keyboard you may find a sweaty, hairy, 320 lbs cigar smoking 50-something dude with a tattoo of ‘Bo loves mommy’ painted on his biceps.

However, tracking down an anonymous moniker is not really that hard, because you are NEVER ANONYMOUS on the Internet. As you travel the Internet your IP ADDRESS is recorded on every site you visit, and as you research using search engines like Google, Yahoo or Bing all your queries plus your IP Address is logged and stored for up to 18 months.

An IP Address is four sets of three digits numbers that electronically locates your computer terminal on the world wide web. In the case of WIFI, a method that many laptops connect the internet with  the IP Address is associated to your wireless router. So, if your router is not WEP coded (security locked) anyone within the range of the signal can connect to your network and browse the Internet. In those cases their activity can be traced back to the owner of the router, that being you.

So, yes, law enforcement or anyone acting under the authority of a court can get access to your activity.  In the case of this John Doe family, they can track them to their door.

All this smacks of big brother looking over your shoulder.  It is a sobering thought for people who interact on the Internet. Open discussion and free speech is what makes the Internet a revolutionary communication tool. However, just because you are not face to face with those you discuss does not give us an open door to slander.

Commenting on news items and opinion columns on the Internet should be a careful practice, as these two court cases have demonstrated. Just because the press has put it out there does not necessarily mean that the article is free of any liability.

Bottom line, on the internet, there is no such thing as Anonymity.