Doe v. Cahill

From Internet Law Treatise

The Defendant anonymously posted allegedly defamatory statements about the Plaintiff, Cahill, on an Internet blog. Cahill, a city councilman, brought a defamation action. Seeking to serve process on Doe, Cahill sought to compel the disclosure of his identity from a third party that had the information. A Superior Court judge applied a good faith standard to test the Plaintiff's complaint and ordered the third party to disclose Doe's identity.

The Delaware Supreme Court reversed the lower court's ruling, finding that the previous standard did not sufficiently protect Doe's First Amendment right to speak anonymously. Applying a test that "appropriately balances one person's right to speak anonymously against another person's right to protect his reputation," the Supreme Court held that Cahill was required to (1) undertake reasonable efforts to notify the anonymous poster that he is the subject of a subpoena or application for an order of disclosure, and (2) submit sufficient evidence to establish a genuine issue of material fact for each essential element of its claim within the Plaintiff’s control.

---

Chapter 2 - Content And Speech Regulation
Obscenity · Communications Decency Act - Obscene Materials · Children's Online Protection Act (COPA) · Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) · State Attempts At Regulation · First Amendment · Anonymity · International Content Regulation