12-31-2007, 06:30 AM
> then why do you seem to be saying that it's OK for it not to
> be punishable if protected by anonymity?
IMHO, there may be rare and highly-specific cases where speech *might* be worthy of criminal punishment or civil damages. In those cases, anonymity would not be relevant to culpability. Thus, I did not mention anonymity in the passages that you cited.
Penetrating anonymous posts in order to prosecute those rare transgressions is an exercise for the courts. And in an ideal world, ONLY the courts would have the authority to penetrate the veil.
> be punishable if protected by anonymity?
IMHO, there may be rare and highly-specific cases where speech *might* be worthy of criminal punishment or civil damages. In those cases, anonymity would not be relevant to culpability. Thus, I did not mention anonymity in the passages that you cited.
Penetrating anonymous posts in order to prosecute those rare transgressions is an exercise for the courts. And in an ideal world, ONLY the courts would have the authority to penetrate the veil.