Suit against blogger tests limits of speech, privacy: Paris, Texas, population 26,490, may be an unlikely Internet frontier. But a defamation lawsuit filed by the local hospital against an anonymous blogger is testing the bounds of Internet privacy, First Amendment freedom of speech and whistle-blower rights.

A state district judge has told lawyers for the hospital and the blogger that he plans to order a Dallas Internet service provider to release the blogger's name. The blogger's lawyer, James Rodgers of Paris, said he will appeal to preserve the man's anonymity.

Rodgers said the core question in the legal battle is whether a plaintiff in a lawsuit can strip a blogger of anonymity merely by filing suit. Without some higher standard to prove a lawsuit has merit, he said, defamation lawsuits could have a chilling effect on Internet free speech.

"Anybody could file a lawsuit and say, 'I feel like I've been defamed. Give me the name,' " Rodgers said.

But there is little case law in Texas or nationally to give judges a standard for when to expose anonymous postings on the Internet.

Since March 2005, The-Paris-site blog has been critical of the business management and health care provided by the Paris Regional Medical Center, owned by Essent Healthcare Inc. of Nashville, Tenn. Paris is about 100 miles northeast of Dallas.

In one mild posting in April, the blog said: "Quality issues are in play, patients are avoiding the facilities unless they have no choice, and employees are only staying because their families anchor them, not because of any loyalty to Essent."

The blogger identifies himself under the pseudonyms of fac_p and Frank Pasquale. Most commenters, some of whom appear to be hospital employees, are anonymous.

In June, Essent filed a defamation lawsuit in state district court against "John Does 1-10" for postings and comments made on the Paris blog, which the suit says has had 169,272 page views "from sites throughout the United States and the rest of the world" since it began. The lawsuit also claims patient privacy was violated under the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.

"We understand and respect the blogger and general public's right to voice their opinions about PRMC and welcome constructive criticism," the company said in a statement. "However, the method used by the defendants is wholly unacceptable."

(Read Original Article - Via The Austin American-Statesman.)