The Court of Appeal dismissed Stephen Fagan's bid for anonymity and said the family of anyone who committed a serious sexual or violent offence might face a "hostile reaction".
One judge, Lord Justice Aikens, said there was "nothing in the position of Stephen Fagan" which could justify any derogation from the general principle of open justice.
Appeal judges had ruled against Fagan, who is in his late 40s and comes from Airdrie, North Lanarkshire, last month but the reasons behind their decision were only published yesterday.
Fagan was given a 14-year jail term by a judge sitting in Newcastle upon Tyne in 2006 after being convicted of committing two rapes - and of administering a drug with intent to commit a crime - in the north-east of England.
The dispute over the publication of his name developed earlier this year after he began publicly-funded legal action in an attempt to win the right to live in Scotland following his release from jail on licence. Fagan, who wants to re-settle in Airdrie, said members of his family might become a "target of hostility" if his return was reported. And his lawyers argued that there was a need to "prevent the risk of violence".
In June, a High Court judge ruled that Fagan could be named - but he imposed a temporary reporting ban until the case had been analysed by the Court of Appeal.
Appeal judges then also ruled that Fagan could be named - at a hearing in London in September - and lifted the reporting ban. The thinking behind their decision was explained in a ruling yesterday.