We have adopted the Metamorph Group’s Legal Terms and Conditions. Please click below to view.
Read TermsWe have adopted the Metamorph Group’s feedback process. Please click below to view
FeedbackWe have adopted the Metamorph Group’s complaints process. Please click below to view
ComplaintsWe are part of the Metamorph Group. Please view our group Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Statement on their website by clicking below
View StatementWe have adopted the Metamorph Group’s Data Management policy. Please click below to view
Data ManagmentSocial media offers many people a level of anonymity that would be hard to achieve outside of online life. While there are a range of reasons people may choose to be anonymous online, this anonymity is often used by individuals to voice opinions – often negative or harmful – without repercussions in the ‘real world’. But is this really the case, and can so-called ‘trolls’ really hide behind a screen?
The recent case of Colliers & Others v Bennett [2020] EWHC 1884 on July 15th says no.
The case relates to an anonymous Twitter account named Harry Tuttle (@arrytuttle) that engaged in heated online arguments about anti-semitism with the claimants, including Rachel Riley of Countdown fame and blogger David Collier. It is alleged that the @arrytuttle account posted defamatory tweets and harassed the claimants – but how do you sue an anonymous account?
In July 2019, Daniel Bennett – a former barrister from Bristol – was outed by another Twitter user as a possible owner of the @arrytuttle account. Immediately following this, the account and all its tweets were deleted. Daniel Bennent subsequently apologised to some users for some tweets from the @arrytuttle account.
The claimants wanted to obtain proof as to who tweeted from @arrytuttle, and to obtain copies of the offending tweets. They applied for both pre action disclosure and a Norwich Pharmacal order, which is an order which requires disclosure of documents to show the identity of a wrongdoer.
After hard fought argument, the court ordered in favour of two of the claimants and Daniel Bennett was ordered to identify who used and had access to the @arrytuttle twitter account between March 2018 and 9 July 2019.
He was also ordered to disclose a narrow category of tweets that could be defamatory about the two successful Claimants (including Rachel Riley). The tweets metadata and analytics are also to be disclosed.
It will be interesting to see whether this results in further action being taken and the impact this has on the behaviour of anonymous accounts online.
For further information, get in touch with our team today at enquiries@lindermyers.co.uk.
Cookie | Duration | Description |
---|---|---|
cookielawinfo-checkbox-advertisement | 1 year | Set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin, this cookie is used to record the user consent for the cookies in the "Advertisement" category . |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics | 11 months | This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics". |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional | 11 months | The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional". |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary | 11 months | This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary". |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others | 11 months | This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other. |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance | 11 months | This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance". |
viewed_cookie_policy | 11 months | The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data. |
Cookie | Duration | Description |
---|---|---|
_ga | 2 years | The _ga cookie, installed by Google Analytics, calculates visitor, session and campaign data and also keeps track of site usage for the site's analytics report. The cookie stores information anonymously and assigns a randomly generated number to recognize unique visitors. |
_gat_gtag_UA_162551336_1 | 1 minute | Set by Google to distinguish users. |
_gid | 1 day | Installed by Google Analytics, _gid cookie stores information on how visitors use a website, while also creating an analytics report of the website's performance. Some of the data that are collected include the number of visitors, their source, and the pages they visit anonymously. |
Cookie | Duration | Description |
---|---|---|
_fbp | 3 months | This cookie is set by Facebook to display advertisements when either on Facebook or on a digital platform powered by Facebook advertising, after visiting the website. |
fr | 3 months | Facebook sets this cookie to show relevant advertisements to users by tracking user behaviour across the web, on sites that have Facebook pixel or Facebook social plugin. |
NID | 6 months | NID cookie, set by Google, is used for advertising purposes; to limit the number of times the user sees an ad, to mute unwanted ads, and to measure the effectiveness of ads. |
Cookie | Duration | Description |
---|---|---|
SESSION | session | No description |