Saturday, October 15, 2011

NY Court Says Even Promoting Alleged Defamatory Content Is Protected By Section 230

Often when we talk about some of the major ports section 230 of the CDA, to ensure that service providers are not responsible for the content created by users, we have commentators who argue that if the provider services not nothing
touch the contents, that section 230 does not apply. It is simply not true. There is now a growing body of case law that protects third parties in such circumstances. For example, people send an email from someone else - even if they write an introduction - were found to be protected by section 230. A recent trial in a court of appeal, New York seems to have much broader immunity, protecting someone reposted a blog (allegedly) defamatory comments on a job title, then added some comments and a graph of the work. And ... that were still to be protected:



applicant Shiamili Christakis, Director General of the heat Realty Corp. (burning), had filed a libel suit against a competitor, the Real Estate Group New York, its director and his assistant (collectively TREGNY), who writes a blog on real estate in New York. A user TREGNY blog (who signed as "Ardor Realty Sucks") commented on a thread on the blog, while several allegedly defamatory statements suggesting that Shiamili mistreated its employees and was racist and antisemitic.

TREGNY
allegedly: (i) moved the debate comment line of an independent, "prefacing the statement that" the following story came to us as one. .. comments, and promoted him to a "post", (ii) adding a title, "Ardor Realty and the people" and a subtitle, "and now it's time for your weekly dose of hate , without changing who you are again, with 'burn Realty aspires. "And for the record, they are. no. . fear "(iii) added a picture of Jesus with the face and Shiamili the title" Chris Shiamili:. Token King of the Jews ", and (iv) a pseudonym Another commentator requested to provide additional land on Shiamili


TREGNY Despite these contributions, the Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal of the claim of defamation based Shiamili immunity under Article 230.
The complete failure (embedded below) shows that the additional content (header, introductory text, image), etc., do not reach the level of defamatory content on its own, and Main content from the node is provided by a third party, but noted by TREGNY, the site is protected by Article 230. This is entirely consistent with previous decisions, and it's nice to see another court recognizes that
Permalink |. Comments | Send this article

0 comments:

Blog Archive

Blog Archive

About Me