> From: Marjorie Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > This case has some interesting implications for site > cracks and defacings . . . > > ~~~~~ > > Libel Found on Internet Message Board Postings > American Lawyer Media > > Bio-medical firm Biomatrix won a ruling from a New Jersey superior > court that found three people published libelous statements against > Biomatrix on two Web sites. The ruling is believed to be one of the > first judgments nationwide against those who defame others online. The > two sites were a Yahoo message board and the message board of Genzyme > Corporation, which plans to merge with Biomatrix this year. > http://www.law.com/professionals/iplaw.html > > ~~~~~ > > An attorney with Boston-based Bingham Dana led a legal team in what > is believed to be one of the first judgments nationwide against those > who defame others online. > > Attorney Charles L. Solomont, representing the bio-medical firm > Biomatrix Inc. in New Jersey, won a ruling from the Bergen County > Superior Court in New Jersey that found three individuals published > libelous statements against Biomatrix on two Web sites. > > The two sites were a Yahoo message board and the message board of > Genzyme Corporation in Cambridge, Mass., which plans to merge with > Biomatrix by the end of this year. > > Defendants Richard and Raymond Costanzo of North Carolina and Ephraim > Morris of Arizona will go to trial now to determine damages in the > defamation suit. Raymond Costanzo and Morris are former employees of > Biomatrix. No court date has been set. > > ANONYMOUS CLAIMS > > According to the court decision written by Superior Court Judge Peter > F. Boggia, the three made anonymous claims online that officers of > Biomatrix were "Nazi doctors" and that a major product of the firm, > Synvisc, had killed several people. They claimed, in court papers, > that [the plaintiffs] "cannot prove damages and no one would take the > postings seriously." > > But the court's decision relied largely on a New Jersey Supreme Court > ruling -- Nappe v. Anschelewitz, Barr, Ansell & Bonello, 97 N.J. 37, > 47 (1984) -- that held "the courts have not adhered to the common-law > distinction and have sustained actions in the absence of proof of > compensatory damage. These include libel, slander per se, nuisance > and malicious prosecution." > > Solomont said the original lawsuit was filed against "John Does," > because the identities of the perpetrators were not known. With help > from Yahoo, he said, "We determined who they were around the time the > companies announced the merger. Their statements could potentially > have some serious ramifications for the companies, and an impact on > shareholders reading them." > > He said the decision has far-ranging implications for other cases now > pending nationwide, in which anonymous, defaming claims are made > against individuals and other entities. > > "People post these messages using aliases and believe it protects > them from liability for their actions. But this case shows the > perpetrators of [such] online claims can be prosecuted." > > ISN is hosted by SecurityFocus.com
