Experienced First Amendment lawyers know that websites hosting user-created content are extremely difficult to sue for defamation. This is due to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, codified at 47 U.S.C. §...more
There are few things more terrifying to a doctor, lawyer or other professional than a bad online review. Online reviews are frequently uncivil, often indelible and in some cases outright false. Meanwhile, Section 230 of the...more
You can rate your favorite pizza place online. Why not your ex-boyfriend?
That’s the idea, at least, behind Lulu. The popular app allows women, verified through their Facebook profiles, to rate men using pre-written...more
Via Section 230, the Communications Decency Act (CDA) provides broad immunity for service providers, hosts and website operators for claims stemming from their publication of information created by third parties....more
TheDirty.com is not exactly deserving of sympathy. Much like Playboy and Hustler pushed the boundaries of the First Amendment in the past, rumor sites like TheDirty.com are pushing the limits of Section 230 immunity for...more
In 2012, we reported on a pair of district court decisions that, based on similar facts, split on whether defendant TheDirty.com, a gossip website, qualified for immunity under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act...more
In This Issue:
- Written Contracts and the Statute of Limitations...Page 1
- Website Owners: Who is Liable for Third Party Postings on Your Website?...Page 2
- Business Tort Brings Sanctions...Page 3
In October 2009, we published the first edition of this White Paper, focusing primarily on social media issues in the United States. The response was overwhelming and far beyond our expectation — clients, friends, press and...more
A recent Fairfax County defamation case involving a consumer’s scathing postings against a contractor on Yelp and Angie’s List raises the issue as to who can be held liable for postings made by third parties.
Back to Top