Re: 10/4/99 - Online Chat Room Isn't as Anonymous As You Might Think
Online Chat Room
Isn't as Anonymous
As You Might Think
---
Subpoenas Let Companies Get
Inside Dope on Detractors;
Suing for Critics' Silence
By Jason Anders
10/04/1999
The Wall Street Journal
(Copyright (c) 1999, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)
Every day, investors crowd online message boards and chat rooms to swap thousands of often-scathing messages about companies. Most boards allow postings to be made using aliases, adding to the no-holds-barred nature of the chatter.
But with increasing regularity, and relative ease, companies are uncovering the identities of their online critics. Most of the time, the users have no idea their personal information has been revealed.
"Usually your name is turned over before you even knew somebody had asked for it, and it's too late to fight it," says Lyrissa Lidsky, an associate professor at the University of Florida College of Law, who has studied lawsuits filed by companies against their online critics.
Web sites generally won't turn over users' personal information such as names and addresses unless faced with a subpoena. But such subpoenas are easy to come by and difficult to fight.
Silicon Investor (www.techstocks.com), one of the most popular stock-chat sites, says it tries to notify users who are the subjects of subpoenas, but can't always do it. "We would need an entire subpoena staff to handle something like that," says Ethan Caldwell , general counsel for Go2Net Inc., the site's parent.
Mr. Caldwell says the site receives about one subpoena a day, and in "about half" of those cases is able to give users warnings that the site is about to turn over their personal information. Mr. Caldwell says the warning is often only a few days before the information is to be revealed, and may not give people enough time to fight the request.
It is difficult to block such a request even if given advanced warning. Subpoenas are generally sought at the beginning of a civil case that has been filed against "John Doe" defendants. Lawyers say courts generally issue subpoenas without question, and are reluctant to block such requests so early in a case.
Mr. Caldwell says he has been troubled by some of the subpoenas he has received from companies that he believes may have questionable motives. "I know at times this has a chilling effect on speech, and I really think that's tragic."
Yahoo! Finance (quote.yahoo.com), a free stock-chat destination, doesn't try to notify its users about subpoenas, in part because it has no idea who most of its users are. "We don't collect or verify personal information, so there's no way we could warn anyone," says Mike Riley, senior producer of the Yahoo! Inc. site.
Often, he says, Yahoo turns over an IP address, a sort of digital footprint left by computers when they visit Web sites. Companies can then use that IP address to track the user back to a particular Internet service provider, which can then be subpoenaed to uncover the user's identity.
America Online Inc. (www.aol.com) has a longstanding policy of giving its users two week's notice before it responds to a subpoena for their personal information, so that users have a chance to challenge the subpoena.
"Our users deserve a chance to challenge the subpoenas," says Kim McCreery, an AOL spokeswoman.
Fighting a subpoena means hiring an attorney -- an expensive and often futile move, says Blake Bell, an attorney with Simpson Thacher & Bartlett in New York.
Prof. Lidsky says cases usually end up as an effort to silence a critic. "These people they're suing don't have any money to pay for damages. There's nothing else to sue them for except silence."
Copyright ¸ 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
interactive.wsj.com
====
Note: The following is from a post on SI, Message 11718766, that appears to predate the above and have a few more quotes in it. However, I can't find this version on the WSJ site.
-----
October 1, 1999
Sites Unmask Online Investors Before They Can Fight Back
By JASON ANDERS
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL INTERACTIVE EDITION
Every day, investors crowd online message boards and chat rooms to swap thousands of often-scathing messages about companies. Most boards allow postings to be made using aliases, adding to the no-holds-barred nature of the chatter.
But with increasing regularity, and relative ease, companies are uncovering the identities of their online critics. Most of the time, the users have no idea their personal information has been revealed.
"Usually your name is turned over before you even knew somebody had asked for it, and it's too late to fight it," says Lyrissa Lidsky, an associate professor at the University of Florida College of Law, who has studied lawsuits filed by companies against their online critics.
Web sites generally won't turn over users' personal information -- like names and addresses -- unless faced with a subpoena. But such subpoenas are easy to come by, lawyers say, and often impossible to fight.
Silicon Investor one of the most popular stock-chat sites, says it tries to notify users who are the subjects of subpoenas, but says it has no commitment to doing so. "It's just not practical for us. We would need an entire subpoena staff to handle something like that," says Ethan Caldwell, general counsel for Go2Net, Silicon Investor's parent.
Mr. Caldwell says the site receives about one subpoena a day, and in "about half" of those cases is able to give users warnings that the site is about to turn over their personal information. Since Silicon Investor is a subscription-based site, that information includes credit-card numbers and billing addresses.
Mr. Caldwell admits that the warning is often only a few days before the information is to be revealed, and may not give people enough time to fight the request.
While it's obviously impossible for a user to fight a subpoena he doesn't know exists, it's still difficult to block such a request even if given advanced warning. Subpoenas are generally sought at the beginning of a civil case that has been filed against "John Doe" defendants. Lawyers say courts generally issue subpoenas without question, and are reluctant to block such requests so early in a case.
"This is an incredibly tough issue for us. ... Whenever we inform someone that there's a subpoena for their information, people ultimately think that somebody is going to use this information to harass them or intimidate them. Sometimes, I think that's a very legitimate fear to have," Mr. Caldwell says.
He says he has been personally troubled by some of the subpoenas he has received from companies -- whom he believes may have questionable motives. "I know at times this has a chilling effect on speech, and I really think that's tragic. ... But we're in a very difficult position," he says. "People sometimes say, 'My anonymity is everything, that's why I'm here. Why won't Silicon Investor defend me?' But ultimately, people have to be responsible for what they say."
Yahoo! Finance (quote.yahoo.com), a free stock-chat destination, doesn't try to notify its users about subpoenas, in part because it has no idea who most of its users are. "We don't collect or verify personal information, so there's no way we could warn anyone," says Mike Riley, senior producer of Yahoo Finance.
Often, he says, Yahoo turns over an IP address, a sort of digital footprint left by computers when they visit Web sites. Companies can then use that IP address to track the user back to a particular Internet service provider, which can then be subpoenaed to uncover the user's identity.
Internet giant America Online on the other hand, is widely regarded as among the most user-friendly when it comes to handling subpoenas. The service has a longstanding policy of giving its users two week's notice before it responds to a subpoena for their personal information, so that users have a chance to challenge the subpoena. (AOL also has a legal team of about 55 lawyers, compared with the two attorneys who handle most of Silicon Investor's subpoenas.)
"We just feel like this is the right thing to do. Our users deserve a chance to challenge the subpoenas," says Kim McCreery, a spokeswoman for the Dulles, Va., online giant.
Of course, fighting a subpoena means hiring an attorney -- an expensive and often futile move, says Blake Bell, an attorney with Simpson Thacher & Bartlett in New York. "In most cases, plaintiffs are going to be able to get the information they want. A judge is going to be reluctant to try the case before it's even clear who the anonymous parties are," says Mr. Bell, who runs a Web site, CyberSecuritiesLaw that tracks so-called cyber libel cases. "Also you have to remember that in many cases you may be dealing with someone who isn't that familiar with lawsuits." Mr. Bell has represented companies that have sought to unmask online investors.
"The average message-board user just isn't prepared for this," agrees Ms. Lidsky, the University of Florida law professor. "If someone says, 'I'm going to sue you for a million dollars,' that's enough to make most people's hearts stop, and likely enough to silence them."
She says that no matter what the initial motivation may have been for a company that brings this type of suit, the cases rarely end up as anything other than an effort to silence a critic. "These people they're suing don't have any money to pay for damages. There's nothing else to sue them for except silence." |
