1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates generally to electronic messaging systems, and in particular, anonymous electronic messaging systems.
2. Description of the Prior Art
In today's digital world, communications are often accomplished through electronic means such as email, messaging, webpages, etc., rather than through traditional face-to-face or telephonic exchanges. The ease and convenience of communicating electronically has dramatically changed communications within an organization—be it educational, business, and/or military organizations, or other endeavors.
One drawback of modern electronic communications is that the message originator (i.e., the individual sending the message) within an organization's electronic email or messaging system is identifiable to the message recipient (i.e., the individual receiving the message) through a message header (e.g., from Bob.Smith@bigcorp.com) or through the internet protocol node address from which the message was sent. This transparency can have a negative impact on the message sender (e.g., a student or employee) who may fear repercussions, reprisal, or public disclosure if he uses the traceable electronic communication to bring a concern to the attention of the organization (e.g., by emailing an organizational authority figure such as a school principal or a boss).
Some electronic communication systems do allow a contributor to participate in conversations anonymously—that is, without revealing the message originator. For example, a user of an Internet forum system can shield his identity by registering for the forum under an unverified alias (e.g., by using a created user name (e.g., joker@aol.com) that doesn't reveal who the contributor is) or by posting messages anonymously in the forum as a guest. As another example, an email user can shield his identity by using an anonymous remailer which receives an email with embedded instructions on where to forward the email and then forwards the email without revealing the original address from which the email was sent, or substitutes a fake source address for the original source address associated with the email. Alternatively, an email user can use pseudonymous remailer software that assigns each user a pseudonym and maintains a database of instructions detailing how to return emails to the original email address or reply to the email—even though the identity of the message originator using that email address may not be known.
The anonymity offered by both online forum messaging and anonymously/pseudonymously remailed messaging, however, is near absolute—the identity shield cannot be easily pierced regardless of the need. Thus, the identity of the anonymous or pseudonymous user threatening harm to himself, others, and/or an organization remains hidden and/or unverifiable—at least during any reasonable timeframe during which his plans could be intercepted. This inability to verify the identity of a message originator poses a problem for some types of organizations (e.g., educational, business, and/or military organizations) that typically need to be able to rely on verifiable communications with known individuals, and makes anonymous electronic communication systems less desirable.
These same types of organizations (e.g., educational, business, and/or military organizations), however, could benefit from electronic communications systems that offer message originators the assurance of anonymity while giving the organization the ability to deal with real problems. For example, a high school could benefit from a system that allows students to anonymously approach counselors for advice on a concern (e.g., teenage sex or alcoholism) or to anonymously report incidents such as inappropriate teacher behavior without fear of reprisal or public disclosure. When the concern triggering the communication (e.g., child abuse) is serious enough, however, a mechanism to discover the verified identity of the message originator would be desirable so that the child could receive medical treatment, counseling, or other assistance and the allegation could be investigated.
USPTO Backgrounds
USPTO Backgrounds