Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

University of Missouri School of Law

Series

Defamation

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Anonymity In Cyberspace: What Can We Learn From John Doe?, Lyrissa Lidsky Jan 2009

Anonymity In Cyberspace: What Can We Learn From John Doe?, Lyrissa Lidsky

Faculty Publications

This Article examines the evolution of the law governing libel suits against anonymous “John Doe” defendants based on Internet speech. Between 1999 and 2009, courts crafted new First Amendment doctrines to protect Internet speakers from having their anonymity automatically stripped away upon the filing of a libel action. Courts also adapted existing First Amendment protections for hyperbole, satire and other non-factual speech to protect the distinctive discourse of Internet message boards. Despite these positive developments, the current state of the law is unsatisfactory. Because the scope of protection for anonymous Internet speech varies greatly by jurisdiction, resourceful plaintiffs can make …


Silencing John Doe: Defamation And Discourse In Cyberspace, Lyrissa Lidsky Jan 2000

Silencing John Doe: Defamation And Discourse In Cyberspace, Lyrissa Lidsky

Faculty Publications

John Doe has become a popular defamation defendant as corporations and their officers bring defamation suits for statements made about them in Internet discussion fora. These new suits are not even arguably about recovering money damages but instead are brought for symbolic reasons — some worthy, some not so worthy. If the only consequence of these suits were that Internet users were held accountable for their speech, the suits would be an unalloyed good. However, these suits threaten to suppress legitimate criticism along with intentional and reckless falsehoods, and existing First Amendment law doctrines are not responsive to the threat …


Defamation, Reputation, And The Myth Of Community, Lyrissa Lidsky Jan 1996

Defamation, Reputation, And The Myth Of Community, Lyrissa Lidsky

Faculty Publications

The complex interaction between defamation, reputation, and community values defines the tort of defamation. A defamatory communication tends to harm a plaintiff's reputation in the eyes of the plaintiff's community. Thus, to determine whether a given statement is defamatory, courts must first identify the plaintiff's community and its norms - an inquiry that presents both theoretical and doctrinal difficulties in a heterogeneous and pluralistic society. Current approaches to identifying the plaintiff's community are particularly inadequate in two common types of cases: (1) cases in which the plaintiff belongs to a subcommunity espousing different values than those prevailing generally, and (2) …