Sorry, I could not be bothered to read the entire article. I stopped when I read that the provider has "reason to know."

Well, the article that is reprinted in its entirety -- another violation of the FT guidelines -- is prima facie evidence that the poster and the provider know that the statment is false. Knowingly permitting false information to continue to be seen is grounds for a lawsuit. Period.

Furthermore, it should be noted that a court in NYC recently lifted the annonymity of a poster who made defamatory remarks about certain individuals. The ISP was forced to divulge the name of the individual and it is up to the injured party as to whether or not she plans to bring a lawsuit against the offender.