Caution: Anything you post can be used against you
May 5, 1997
1.14 a.m. EDT (0514 GMT)
(AP) -- When the Founding Fathers wrote the First Amendment protecting freedom of the press,
they never imagined millions of Americans would someday have their own version of one sitting in
their back rooms.
But with the advent of the World Wide Web, that's exactly what has happened. And from this
revolution has emerged a new legal quandary: Just what standards are private individuals to be held
to when it comes to what they "publish'' on the millions of Web pages and other online forums that
serve as the world's soapbox?
To a great extent, the answer thus far is this: No one knows. With the Web revolution less than 3
years old, a body of case law hasn't yet been built up. But lawyers who study online issues do have
some observations -- and advice.
First off, they note, the line between slander, once the realm of individuals, and libel, the bane of
publishers, has been blurred. It used to be that spreading malicious gossip about someone down at
the barbershop could lead to charges of slander. But slander, by definition spoken, was hard to
prove and generally didn't reach enough people to do any major harm.
Post that same information where it can be read by millions online, however, and you've suddenly
entered the realm of libel -- governed by stricter laws originally written to cover print
publications.
"Let's face it,'' says Mark Rasch, director of information security law and policy at the Center for
Information Protection at Science Applications International Corp. in McLean, Va. "If I were to
print up a handbill saying bad things about my neighbor that were false, at most I could distribute a
couple of hundred of them. With the Web, I can now damage his reputation worldwide.''
The law is clear: Libel consists of publishing a false and defamatory statement about an identifiable
person, causing injury to the subject's reputation. Often tied to it is the legal notion of defamation,
defined as that which exposes a person to hatred, ridicule or contempt, causing them to be shunned
or injuring their business or calling.
Truth is always a defense against libel, so if your Web page says someone has two heads and they
do, you're fine. But say they're a murderer and you can expect someone to come asking for some
proof -- and possibly a bill for damages if you don't have any.
Then, there's invasion of privacy. It's one thing to pass along a juicy bit of gossip to a friend. It's
quite another to post it to the Web.
"Let's say, for instance, you disclose some private fact about somebody -- say, their medical
records. Or you snuck into their house and took a nudie photo of them and put it up on the Net.
That would be a no-no under civil law and they could sue for damages,'' says David Banisar, staff
counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington, D.C.
Although few of these cases have actually gone to court, lawyers often are called in when things get
ugly.
"I know of a few cases where the ex-husband and ex-wife have gone after each other on the Net,''
Banisar says. "In one instance, the ex-wife put up a diatribe page on what a scumbag he was and
how he wasn't paying his child support -- and gave out his phone number so suitably angry women
could take it up with him.''
Remember, too, that the Internet's reach magnifies everything in the eyes of the law.
Shouting "You jerk, I'm gonna belt you one!'' at a careless driver who runs over your mailbox
won't get you into trouble. But posting the threat on the Internet is dangerous. It's all a question of
reach: Anything done over a telecommunications device is automatically an interstate
communication.
"This suddenly makes it a federal issue if you e-mail,'' Banisar warns.
State statutes vary, but when federal laws come into effect, any communication containing a threat
to kidnap or injure a person carries with it the possibility of imprisonment up to five years or a
fine of up to $1,000.
And an entirely different level of concern pops up when the object of the threat is an elected
official. Like the "no jokes'' signs posted by airport metal detectors, the FBI has no sense of humor
when it comes to threatening officeholders.
"We can't forget all those idiots arrested for sending threats to the president. So don't send threats
to the president over e-mail. It's a federal crime,'' Banisar says.
Fraud is another sticking point. It's illegal everywhere, of course. But the Federal Trade
Commission has taken an especially hard line against fraud on the Net. Send a snail-mail chain
letter asking for money and you might get a call from postal authorities. Try it on the Web,
however, and you'll be investigated by the FTC forces who track online scammers.
But in the end, the biggest vulnerability of any self-publisher on the Web is probably the wrath of
large corporations.
You can say their logos are ugly and their presidents are jerks and they don't flinch. But try using
any variety of a heavily trademarked name or image on your site and watch the injunctions flow.
Generally speaking, it's other businesses who get into trouble. But, once in a while, an individual
will set out to make a point -- and get a legally phrased e-mail in response. Several cases have
resulted in Web sites' being taken down, including individuals who posted statements against Kmart
and McDonald's.
Overall, remember that putting words or pictures up on your Web page is just like publishing them
in the newspaper.
Use Rasch's simple test: "What you should avoid putting on the Web is the same stuff you'd avoid
putting on leaflets and handing out on the street.'' |
