It's going to be an important case, because it will go forward in raising a lot of questions ranging from rules that all journalists should follow when protecting their (sources) to the very definition of what a journalist is in the digital age.

We are going to continue to pursue this until we get some rules from the court that will protect users' anonymity online.

Just because we are talking about the Internet does not mean we should lose the right to speak anonymously.

It's a functional test: Is what you are doing journalism?

This case comes at a time when people are starting to recognize that the information they put into their computers creates a record. In the bigger picture, as people input more information into computers, they are losing control over that. We're leaving a digital footprint with all sorts of information about ourselves.

I am not a has-been. I am a will be.