Internet Law: Defamation, Anonymous Posters, and Online Speech

Online speech disputes turn on two questions: who said it, and whether the law lets someone make them answer for it. Jonathan Phillips represents people and businesses hurt by false online posts, and people facing subpoenas or suits over what they posted, in Illinois courts and federal courts nationwide. Updated October 2026.

Which page is yours?

If you were hurt by something posted online

If you posted something and are being pursued

What these disputes have in common

  • The platform is usually not the target. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (47 U.S.C. § 230) shields most websites from liability for what users post, so the claim runs against the person who posted.

  • Identity is the first fight. A plaintiff has to unmask the poster before suing, and the poster can oppose it. Illinois courts apply a specific process under Supreme Court Rule 224.

  • Deadlines are short. Illinois generally allows one year to sue for defamation, and platforms keep logs for limited periods.

  • Opinion, truth, and privilege decide many cases. A harsh or unfair statement is not automatically defamation, and Illinois's Citizen Participation Act lets a court dismiss suits aimed at protected speech early.

How I handle these

Jonathan has handled both sides of online speech cases, including defending defamation claims, unmasking anonymous posters, unmasking the operators of deepfake ad campaigns with large settlements and takedowns, keeping anonymous speakers anonymous, and defending people who reported assaults online. He has handled multitudes internet law matters. Each page above is written for one side, and Jonathan checks for conflicts before taking either. Flat fees and payment plans are available for most internet law matters. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Results

  • When a shady online company sold supplements using deep fake videos of a medical professional, Jonathan was able to use the Courts to determine the owner of the company, sue them, and secure a significant settlement

  • When a photographer attempted to unmask an anonymous poster of his images, Jonathan not only successfully had the subpoena quashed, but the Court also reprimanded the photographer. Philpot v. Domains by Proxy.

  • Jonathan successfully defended a person accused of defaming a large not-for-profit organization through Facebook posts.

  • He successfully sealed a federal court docket of a person accused of downloading pornography on the internet, re-establishing the individual’s privacy.

  • Jonathan has drafted terms and conditions, privacy policies, and provided regulatory compliance counseling to numerous website owners.

  • In Koppaka v. Doe Jonathan represented the John Doe defendant.  In this Northern District of Illinois internet case, Jon’s client was an anonymous individual in Tennessee sued for alleged violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. After filing our Motion to Dismiss, arguing lack of jurisdiction, the Plaintiff dismissed the case voluntarily.

  • In a recent case concerning California’s laws regarding subscription box auto-renewals, Jonathan successfully negotiated a settlement extricating his client from potential liability at an amount acceptable to the client.

  • In another recent matter, Jonathan defended a woman accused of defamation. His client posted about her sexual assault on the internet. Putting up a vigorous defense, the plaintiff settled the matter on terms favorable to Jonathan’s client.

Frequently asked questions

Do you represent both people who were defamed and people accused of defamation? Yes. Each page is written for one side, and Jonathan takes a matter only after checking for a conflict.

Can a platform like Google, Yelp, or Facebook be sued for what users post? Usually not. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protects platforms from liability for most user posts, which is why these cases target the person who posted.

What does it cost? Flat fees and payment plans are available for most internet law matters.

Jonathan L.A. Phillips, Brown, Hay & Stephens, LLP. Last reviewed October 2026. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.