Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Zeppo

not quite, this is a time place and manner question.

The website is INTENDED as a revenge site. It is not a forum for ideas, it is a platform by DESIGN to do damage.

There are pleanty of legal examples under old media where this websites liability is inevitable in the strict legal sense of the word.

Disclaimers will not protect them from their negligence. The founders better start praying they don't get hit with punatives because the judge may want to make an example in the New Media era.


33 posted on 06/30/2006 3:29:19 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]


To: longtermmemmory
The plaintiff will have a very high hurdle to overcome. IANAL, but nevertheless I know that the Communications Decency Act provides some pretty broad safe harbors for website operators. Take a look at this Wikipedia entry - while the Wikipedia entry itself is not authoritative, it contains links to a number of source documents that are.
46 posted on 06/30/2006 3:59:53 PM PDT by Zeppo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson