Suit Alleging Libel by E-Mail Puts Internet to a New Test
In August, hundreds of employees at GoldenRAM Inc. received a remarkable set of electronic messages: A salesman at the Irvine firm announced he was profiting from confidential company information and urged them to investigate him.
But the salesman, John Mash, insists he didn’t send the rambling, profanity-laced e-mails. Rather, he says he was the victim of a cyber-impersonator who somehow sent out messages that appeared to come from Mash’s computer.
Such Internet impersonations are not uncommon as people become more reliant on e-mail and Web pages to communicate. But Mash’s case took an unusual twist this fall when the 31-year-old Tustin resident filed a libel suit in Orange County Superior Court against the person he believes sent the fake e-mails.
Mash is seeking at least $1 million in damages, saying the messages were highly embarrassing and hurt his career. He accuses a former associate, David Cook, of sending the e-mail.
Cook’s attorney strongly denied the allegations and said there is no evidence linking his client to the e-mails. The attorney, however, declined to discuss details of the case.
The case isn’t expected to set any legal precedents about libel in cyberspace. But it marks one of the first attempts by local courts to grapple with issues of free speech and how they relate to the freewheeling, still-evolving Internet.
Libel and slander laws usually involve questionable statements printed in newspapers or broadcast on television and radio. Experts said the advent of e-mail and Web pages that can be viewed by millions opens the laws to a host of new interpretations.
“It’s not like this has never happened in the physical world, the e-mail world just makes it easier,” said David Banisar, policy director for the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington, D.C.
Last year, a Northern California woman was convicted of forgery for faking an e-mail that she later used to support a wrongful termination suit against Oracle Corp. A jury ruled that the woman had used her boss’ e-mail address to create a message that provided false evidence of her claim.
The Orange County case stems from e-mails sent in August to Mash’s colleagues, clients, and bosses at GoldenRAM, a computer chip firm.
The messages were laced with obscenities and bizarre rants and spelled out how Mash planned to set up a competing company using insider information. The admission is followed by a plea:
“You probably are wondering why I am so stupid to tell you this information. The reason is simple. I need to be stopped. I cannot control my greed and the ability to use others. . . . Please launch your own investigation, because I need to be caught red-handed.”
Mash’s attorney, Richard Farnell, said the messages were deeply humiliating and have damaged Mash’s reputation. Farnell said the people who received the messages were mystified.
“They were shocked. They didn’t know what to think,” he said. “People started asking [Mash] questions. It was highly embarrassing and potentially damaging to his career.”
Mash said the e-mails are still the source of office gossip.
“Imagine you’re sitting at your desk and not only you but 200 people you work with are e-mailed a very slanderous and tasteless e-mail,” he said. “I used to be respected around here. Now it’s different.”
Mash and his attorneys said they eventually traced the e-mail to another Orange County company where Cook serves as a consultant. They believe the fake e-mail was generated from a Yahoo Web site address created in his name without his knowledge.
The e-mails could not be traced to a specific person at the company, but Mash believes Cook is the culprit because they recently had a falling out over a business deal. Cook’s attorney labeled Mash’s contentions untrue and said they welcome the opportunity to address the allegations in court.
People who assume someone else’s e-mail identity can do so by various means. It can be done, for example, by simply accessing a terminal when the person has left for a cup of coffee--or by changing the address line to another person’s name.
Daniel Janal, a communications consultant who wrote a book on how businesses can protect themselves against Internet foul play, said he has seen the number of Internet identity thefts grow in recent years.
In one case, he said a union involved in a labor dispute with a Louisiana manufacturer posted a Web page containing a fabricated interview with the president of the company. Like most cases, Janal said the matter was settled when the company took legal action to have the site shut down.
The potential for misuse of Internet identities can be eliminated, he added, by the use of digital signatures, which enable people to verify the authenticity of e-mails they receive. But even though their use is growing, digital signatures are far from universal.
Legal experts said existing libel laws can be used successfully in arguing Internet cases.
Libel consists of publishing a false and defamatory statement about an identifiable person, causing injury to the subject’s reputation. Truth is considered the prime defense against libel.
Banisar, with the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said he expects more cyber-libel cases in the coming years--until more secure e-mail is in general use.
