|
''Doe v. Cahill'', 884 A.2d 451 (Del. 2005), is a significant case in the realm of anonymous internet speech and the First Amendment. While similar issues had been tackled involving criticism of a publicly traded company,〔''In re Subpoena to AOL'',(WL 1210372, 2000 Va. Cir. LEXIS 220 ) (Va. Cir. Ct. 2000), (on other grounds, 542 S.E.2d 377 ) (Va. 2001).〕 the case marks the first time a U.S. State Supreme Court addressed the issue of anonymous internet speech and defamation "in the context of a case involving political criticism of a public figure."〔''Doe v. Cahill'', (884 A.2d 451 ) (Del. 2005).〕 ==Background== In 2004, an anonymous internet user, referred to in the decision as Doe, posted comments under the alias "Proud Citizen" on a website called the "Smyrna/Clayton Issues Blog" regarding the performance of Patrick and Julia Cahill as City Councilman of Smyrna. The website was sponsored by the Delaware State News. The guidelines for use of the blog simply stated "()his is your hometown forum for opinions about public issues." On September 18, 2004 Doe posted the following statement: :If only Councilman Cahill was able to display the same leadership skills, :energy and enthusiasm toward the revitalization and growth of :the fine town of Smyrna as Mayor Schaeffer has demonstrated! While :Mayor Schaeffer has made great strides toward improving the :livelihood of Smyrna’s citizens, Cahill has devoted all of his energy to :being a divisive impediment to any kind of cooperative movement. :Anyone who has spent any amount of time with Cahill would be keenly :aware of such character flaws, not to mention an obvious mental :deterioration. Cahill is a prime example of failed leadership – his :eventual ousting is exactly what Smyrna needs in order to move :forward and establish a community that is able to thrive on its own :economic stability and common pride in its town. On September 19, 2004 Doe added: :Gahill ''()'' is as paranoid as everyone in the town thinks he is. The :mayor needs support from his citizens and protections from :unfounded attacks… It was these two internet postings that formed the basis for the legal action discussed below. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Doe v. Cahill」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|