A federal judge in Alabama has ordered a Sports Illustrated writer to disclose his confidential sources in a libel case, according to this article in the Fulton (GA) County Daily Report.

According to the article the plaintiff in the case posits a three part test when seeking the identity of anonymous sources in a defamation case: one, the information must be relevant to the allegations; two, it must not be obtainable by other means; and three, there must be a compelling need for the information.

What will happen when weblog writers (or weblogs themselves, if they become corporate entities, as I predict many will) become defendants in similar libel suits? What if plaintiff makes an argument that the identity of the “confidential source” at issue in the libel can be discovered via a careful perusal of all of the blog's incoming and outgoing http and smtp traffic as stored in the blog’s ISP? Can plaintiff simply make a discovery demand? Considering that most blog writers get most, if not all, of their information via email (as opposed to old school journalists that ‘pound the pavement’ and talk to confidential sources in dark alleys beneath dim yellow bulbs) there is a much more readily discoverable paper trail (or, more accurately, electronic trail). How electronic privacy and related issues play into the libel law versus first amendment conflict, I’m not sure. Maybe the libel law bloggers can chime in.