ADD AS FRIEND
SEND MESSAGE
GIFT PLUS
IGNORE USER
REPORT ABUSE

FRIENDS

 
 
1 of 3
 

BASICS

Birthday:January 23, 1980
Location:Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Join Date:09:39pm | May 08, '04
Profile Updated:11:59pm | Nov 18, '05
Last Active:11:23am | Mar 31, '10

INTERESTS

Movies:Science Fiction
Art:Photography
Animals/Pets:Dogs
Cars:Formula 1
Music:Jazz
Sports:Badminton, Running, Track and Field
Activities:Gambling, Traveling

LATEST BLOG ENTRY

 
12:36am | Sep 11, '06 | No Comments
http://www.techdirt.com/



There's A Good Reason Why Online Sites Shouldn't Be Liable For The Actions Of Its Users
from the not-this-again dept

Over the years, we've had plenty of stories concerning the liability of websites when users post defamatory or libelous content. The law (section 230 of the Communications Decency Act) is pretty clear, keeping site owners free of liability for the actions of their users. However, as yet another such case comes to light, this time in California, it seems like many people misunderstand why the law is written this way. That article has a typical quote from someone who doesn't seem to understand why the law is written this way, saying: "While protection to ferret out the truth is nice, I kind of wish the courts or Congress would revisit this law. It bothers me to run content online that is clearly defamatory but to get to say it's OK because we can't get sued. It's like a legal neener-neener." That statement is wrong. The law does not say "it's OK." Wh