<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Suit could break ground in blog law</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cyberjournalist.net/suit-could-break-ground-in-blog-law/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cyberjournalist.net/suit-could-break-ground-in-blog-law/</link>
	<description>News and resources about how technology is transforming the media</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 May 2012 10:15:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon Garfunkel</title>
		<link>http://www.cyberjournalist.net/suit-could-break-ground-in-blog-law/comment-page-1/#comment-2240</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon Garfunkel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Jan 2006 13:11:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cyberjournalist.net/?p=2529#comment-2240</guid>
		<description>The suit could break ground, if only to challenge the &lt;a href=&quot;http://civilities.net/ScalesOfDiscourse-AnonCred&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;faulty reasoning&lt;/a&gt; in the Delaware &lt;i&gt;Cahill&lt;/i&gt; case, to wit:

&quot;Blogs and chat rooms tend to be vehicles for the expression of opinions; by their very nature, they are not a source of facts or data upon which a reasonable person would rely.&quot;

Courts (and the public) are going to have to expand their vocabulary that there might be different &lt;i&gt;types&lt;/i&gt; of blogs which would thus be judged differently.

Incidentally, in the &lt;i&gt;Cahill&lt;/i&gt; decision, the anonymous message board posters (not bloggers) were allowed to stay anonymous. Yet in this case, the plaintiff and the court were able to discover the identity behind minnesotademocratsexposed.com (which I believe is registered via Domains By Proxy) in order to serve the civil suit papers. If one wants to be an anonymous blogger with their own domain, this outing doesn&#039;t portend very well.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The suit could break ground, if only to challenge the <a href="http://civilities.net/ScalesOfDiscourse-AnonCred" rel="nofollow">faulty reasoning</a> in the Delaware <i>Cahill</i> case, to wit:</p>
<p>&#8220;Blogs and chat rooms tend to be vehicles for the expression of opinions; by their very nature, they are not a source of facts or data upon which a reasonable person would rely.&#8221;</p>
<p>Courts (and the public) are going to have to expand their vocabulary that there might be different <i>types</i> of blogs which would thus be judged differently.</p>
<p>Incidentally, in the <i>Cahill</i> decision, the anonymous message board posters (not bloggers) were allowed to stay anonymous. Yet in this case, the plaintiff and the court were able to discover the identity behind minnesotademocratsexposed.com (which I believe is registered via Domains By Proxy) in order to serve the civil suit papers. If one wants to be an anonymous blogger with their own domain, this outing doesn&#8217;t portend very well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

