http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2002/06/53265

http://www.eff.org/issues/anonymity

Let’s hope this legislation doesn’t pass, but if it does, it should be overturned.

ISPs can and have uncovered the real identities of anonymous posters, for example when served with a court order in the case of persons posting libelous or threatening material. I’ve long held that there’s no such thing as privacy online – anyone (also read as, any government agency or any private enterprise) with sufficient means and motivation can suss out the identity and trail of anyone who leaves a digital footprint.

It’s that “means and motivation” bit that’s the sticking point. The police have the means to bust down your door in the middle of the night, but their motivation is limited by a) your behavior and b) (in the US at least) the US Constitution (and the long history of SCOTUS rulings on the 4th and 9th Amendments – see http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#privacy ).

“If anonymous internet posts are outlawed, only outlaws will post anonymously.”

We should also consider the fact that anonymity has been around for a long time, and people will always find a way to shield their identity if they so choose. Letters clipped from magazines, face masks, bricks thrown through windows… Humanity has a long-standing tradition of making yourself known without making yourself vulnerable. An anonymous voice is still a voice. Does this protection sometimes cause people to say and do things they might not have otherwise? Absolutely. But sometimes (sadly, more not than often) those things need to be said, and losing that would be dangerous.

Now I realize that I haven’t actually answered the question. Is anonymity a right? I think that the point is moot. People will find a way around this one if they want to.