<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Judge could order US newspaper to hand over identities of anonymous comment posters</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/2008/06/30/judge-could-order-us-newspaper-to-hand-over-identities-of-anonymous-comment-posters/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/2008/06/30/judge-could-order-us-newspaper-to-hand-over-identities-of-anonymous-comment-posters/</link>
	<description>Online journalism news</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 19:16:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: baz</title>
		<link>http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/2008/06/30/judge-could-order-us-newspaper-to-hand-over-identities-of-anonymous-comment-posters/comment-page-1/#comment-5524</link>
		<dc:creator>baz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:46:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/?p=1436#comment-5524</guid>
		<description>Surely these comment posters aren&#039;t &quot;anonymous&quot; in the strict sense of the word, as they have registered on the site and have &quot;handles&quot; (“SAVE10543,” “hadenough,” and “aoxomoxoa”). That usually means the site would have a record of their details and even IP addresses from which they posted. Is this really news, that a site must had over user details to further a police investigation? I think your use of the word &quot;anonymous&quot; is more of a click-magnet.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Surely these comment posters aren&#8217;t &#8220;anonymous&#8221; in the strict sense of the word, as they have registered on the site and have &#8220;handles&#8221; (“SAVE10543,” “hadenough,” and “aoxomoxoa”). That usually means the site would have a record of their details and even IP addresses from which they posted. Is this really news, that a site must had over user details to further a police investigation? I think your use of the word &#8220;anonymous&#8221; is more of a click-magnet.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

