Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
July 22, 2014, 10:51:04 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: California court: websites not liable for libel in third-party postings  (Read 855 times)
Ron
Getbigistrator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 9455


Getbig!


View Profile
« on: November 21, 2006, 12:49:11 AM »

Regarding websites, and board - here is a recent court ruling in California...

Nov 20 6:15 PM US/Eastern

SAN JOSE, Calif. (AP) - Websites that publish inflammatory information written by other parties cannot be sued for libel, the California Supreme Court ruled Monday.

The ruling in favour of free online expression was a victory for a San Diego woman who was sued by two doctors for posting an allegedly libelous e-mail on two websites.

Some of the Internet's biggest names, including Amazon.com, America Online Inc., EBay Inc., Google Inc., Microsoft Corp. and Yahoo Inc., took the defendant's side out of concern a ruling against her would expose them to liability.

In reversing an appellate court's decision, the state Supreme Court ruled that the Communications Decency Act of 1996 provides broad immunity from defamation lawsuits for people who publish information on the Internet that was gathered from another source.

"The prospect of blanket immunity for those who intentionally redistribute defamatory statements on the Internet has disturbing implications," Associate Justice Carol Corrigan wrote in the majority opinion. "Nevertheless ... statutory immunity serves to protect online freedom of expression and to encourage self-regulation, as Congress intended."

Unless the U.S. Congress revises the existing law, people who claim they were defamed in an Internet posting can only seek damages from the original source of the statement, the court ruled.


Report to moderator   Logged
24KT
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Female
Posts: 24240


Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244


View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 24, 2006, 04:52:05 AM »

Sweet.

Does this mean things can go hog-wild now? All the crazies just escaped from the asylum.  Grin

Nope, ...it means that if someone reprints an article previously published by Reuters, Ron cannot be held liable as the originator of the content. You are still responsible for your own posts tho, ...and Ron is still responsibility to the extent that he participates in, facilitates, and/or enables the abuse or defamation.

ie: If Associated Press or Reuters says you are a poopy pants, Ron is OK. If I say you're a poopy pants, and you object, and I am unable to produce the messy fruit of the looms to back up what I say, then I'm in trouble, ...and possibly Ron if he permitted the liable to remain unchecked.
Report to moderator   Logged

w
torquemada
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1262


Billycarp ruled...


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: November 27, 2006, 04:56:00 PM »

In other news, Ron breathes a deep sigh of relief... Wink
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!