1. Why will formal discovery be more effective than merely requesting the information informally?

2. From the standpoint of the operators of blogs and Internet chat rooms, how does the formal discovery process provide them with real and intangible protection?

After 20/20 Financial Consulting discovered allegedly defamatory statements about itself posted on various websites and blogs by anonymous authors, the firm conducted an unsuccessful preliminary investigation to discover the names of the authors from the operators of the websites and blogs. Subsequently, 20/20 filed suit naming five unknown authors as “John Doe” defendants and sought a court order to conduct expedited discovery in an attempt to establish the true identities of the authors. The rules that govern federal court procedures allow expedited discovery if the information obtained will make trial more efficient.

The U.S. District Court in Colorado found in favor of 20/20 and granted its request for expedited discovery. The court ruled that since the plaintiff had exhausted reasonable attempts to identify the defendants through nonjudicial means, 20/20 was entitled to use the tools of discovery in order to help it locate the anonymous authors of the alleged defamatory Internet posts. Since the court found that discovery would be the only practical way to ascertain the true identities of the defendants, it ruled that 20/20 should be given the opportunity to pursue its claim against the defendants in an efficient manner.

“The court finds that good cause exists to permit Plaintiff to conduct expedited discovery to discover the identities of Defendants. Indeed, this case is largely analogous to [a previous case] where the court permitted expedited discovery to identify defendants allegedly engaged in copyright infringement by downloading and distributing the plaintiffs’ recordings using an online media distribution system. There the court found that the plaintiffs had set forth good cause for expedited discovery because the ‘Defendants must be identified before this suit can progress further. Much like [the defendants in that case], Defendants here have engaged in anonymous online behavior, which will likely remain anonymous unless Plaintiff is able to ascertain their identities. And thus far, Plaintiff has been unsuccessful in its attempts to ascertain Defendants’ identities through informal, pre-lawsuit investigation. Because it appears likely that Plaintiff will continue to be thwarted in its attempts to identify Defendants without the benefit of formal discovery mechanisms, the court finds that Plaintiff should be permitted to conduct expedited discovery.”