Following on from the rather worrying news that Google/Blogger had caved in and released the name of a blogger to the woman she had made unpleasant comments about, there are other signs of people using the legal precedent and following suit.

The Houston Chronicle may not be on your daily reading list, but carries the story of the attorney for a Texas man charged in the death of a four-year-old who ‘has asked several local media outlets to provide the names of readers and listeners who commented about his client online’ stating that his client ‘was struck by the conclusions people drew about his client and the specificity of some comments that made it appear they came from people with personal knowledge of the case.’

It seems that they have something more significant in mind than comments along the lines of “he’s a kiddie murdering bastard who should be strung up by his balls” although you can’t argue that ‘personal knowledge’ might give you that ‘conclusion’ whether or not they hedged their legal bets by typing “allegedly” in at the appropriate moments.

Media outlets who have been subpoenaed include The Houston Chronicle, the Conroe Courier, KHOU (Houston area Channel 11, CBS affiliate) and KTRK (Houston area Channel 13, ABC affiliate). Most have moved to squash the legal action which seems to TheEye to be a bit of a fishing expedition, and it’ll be interesting to see if when it fails whether the lawyer will then try the too-much-publicity-no-fair-trial argument next.

In the meantime it leaves us with yet another attempt by the US courts to chip away at blogger anonymity. Speaking as a native Red Indian living somewhere in Dakota, I’m not bothered.