Google reveals identity of Cohen 'skank' blogger

There's no denying the sex appeal of a story featuring a gorgeous model, a mean-spirited name-calling detractor, allegations of sleazy sexual behavior, blogs and Google. That's a hit-chaser's wet dream. But of meatier concern: does a court's order that Google turn over the identity of the blogger who called Liskula Cohen "skank" change the rules of blogging game?

Background, courtesy of GMA, which had an exclusive interview with Cohen: An anonymous blogger posted photos of Cohen on her Blogger.com blog with cheery captions like "Skankiest in NYC," a "psychotic, lying, whoring ... skank" and "desperation seeps from her soul, if she even has one." Cohen sued the unknown blogger and demanded Google turn over the information, which it resisted. It took a judge's order to get Google to turn over a name and email address, which apparently was legit, as Cohen reported:

Thank God it was her… she's an irrelevant person in my life. She's just somebody that, whenever I would go out to a restaurant, to a party in New York City … she was just that girl that was always there.

So now that Google had to turn the info over, does that mean that bloggers will be held responsible for their defamatory statements? It would seem so, and that would be a good development. Although the problem on the Internet is that once published these things archive themselves and propogate themselves forever. In any case, bloggers might be well advised to give false information to providers if they don't want to be exposed.

Some camps are arguing it's just this sort of defamatory activity that justifies stripping Section 230 immunity from service providers. My argument is that a little defamation is a small price to pay for the benefits of a free Internet, but as Google grows ever more powerful, there may be growing displeasure with their free pass.