Lying, smearing, impersonating, and taunting other people in the internet through the use of anonymous accounts has become an exciting sport for some. There is a massive audience for this: people who would never buy the National Enquirer can be found scurrying to the internet for the latest gossip, whether true or false.

One anonymous blogger devoted a blog to insulting a Canadian-born model named Liskula Cohen. The insults included alleging that Cohen was “psychotic,” a liar, a “skank” (slang for a low-class, promiscuous woman), and even a participant in scandalous sexual acts. Pictures of her, which had been edited, were posted.

Cohen fought back. But unlike articles in the National Enquirer, there is little accountability for defamation on the internet. Much of it is perpetrated under false names or by people who keep their names secret. Why anyone pays any attention to anonymous gossip-mongering is baffling, but the reality is that many seem to enjoy taking it seriously and repeating it. National Enquirer-like gossip can be found on Wikipedia.

Google hosted the blog that contained the smears of Cohen, and Google’s policy forbids disclosing the identity of the blogger unless ordered to do so by a court. In New York, courts first look to whether the victim has a likelihood of succeeding in a defamation lawsuit against the perpetrator. If so, New York courts will order Google to disclose the identity of the perpetrator.

In January 2009, Cohen filed a lawsuit in New York against Google in order to determine the identity of the blogger who was attacking her on the internet. The Court looked to the rules for defamation and held that the blog could be considered defamatory. The Court found that Cohen might be able to satisfy the four requirements of defamation: a false and unprivileged statement, published to a third party, which constitutes fault by at least a negligence standard, and which causes either special harm or is defamatory per se. This basic standard for defamation in New York is set forth in Dillon v. City of New York, 261 A.D.2d 34, 38 (1st Dept 1999).

Accordingly, on August 17, 2009, the Court ordered Google to release to Cohen the identity of the anonymous blogger, including her name, address, email address, IP address and telephone number. Cohen v. Google, (N.Y. Co. Sup. Ct.) http://www.reputationdefenderblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/liskula-cohen-google-lawsuit.pdf

The world then found out that the blogger was another woman, a fashion student who had seen Cohen at social functions and events in New York City. Once revealed, the blogger apologized, but then struck back at Google with a $15 million lawsuit for disclosing her identity.

This case has sent shock waves through the underground world of internet bullies, vandals and deceivers. Her defenders insist that she has a First Amendment right in anonymous speech, citing the Federalist Papers as an example of anonymous articles by our Founding Fathers. But many disagree, citing numerous other instances of harmful cyberbulling, a general term for internet mischief that intimidates, harasses, or unfairly ridicules others. Increasingly, courts are siding with the victims of cyberbulling.