The contemporary equivalent of Hustler Magazine v. Falwell was dismissed earlier this week. No dramatic legal proceedings, no Moral Majority sort of uproar, and hopefully probably no subsequent Courtney Love popcorn vehicle -- New Jersey Superior Court Judge Menelaos Toskos simply determined that a lawsuit against the website-turned-book Hot Chicks with Douchebags did not qualify as defamation.
Three women (the "hot chicks" in question) sued the publishing house Simon & Schuster after learning that they appeared in photographs used in the book, protesting the implication that they are "females who date dubious men." In his summary judgment, Toskos upheld that libel cannot exist if the material is "susceptible of only a non-defamatory meaning and is clearly understood as being parody, satire, humor or fantasy."
It's nearly certain that a similar defamation suit brought against Google will go the same way. Fashion model Liskula Cohen seeks a court order against the company in an attempt to learn the identity of a blogger who spoke of her in a derogatory fashion. While the technology component makes the case less clear cut, it also renders it even more groundless given that Google wasn't the one saying nasty things in the first place. In the extremely unlikely event that Cohen is successful, her case will have huge implications for both freedom of speech and privacy. The decision will also almost assuredly cause the Internet to implode upon itself.
Awful and unnecessary as it is that these women are being subjected to petty meanness, there is absolutely no question that dismissal is the way to approach these cases. The courts are no place for junior high melodrama, no matter how douchey.
--Alexandra Gutierrez
