The plaintiffs then subpoena service providers or message board operators demanding that they link the Does to real individuals. Now, many of the larger ones are at least notifying the individuals. AOL, which has always had a notification policy, gives subscribers about two weeks to file a challenge. But few have fought subpoenas on subscribers' behalf. Although AOL in recent months has bucked the trend by filing briefs in courts to support limiting subpoenas, the company usually complies with them.
Internet companies consider themselves more like a phone company than a publisher.
By contrast, news organizations have historically fought subpoenas that seek to unmask anonymous sources. Court rulings in online anonymity cases have been mixed. Last year, a Florida judge said a businessman's right to face his accuser in court was more important than the defendant's right to remain anonymous. A Florida appeals court later affirmed the ruling in favor of former Hvide Marine Inc. chief executive Erik Hvide, who contends he was forced out of his job because of the postings. But in a case under appeal in Pennsylvania, a judge ruled that anonymous writers must have a chance to challenge the merits of a lawsuit before they can be ordered identified.