Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Pluvia's Fist.com - Pluvia's Plays & Portfolio -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Smartypts who wrote (937)	8/24/2000 12:42:26 PM
From: Bear Down	Respond to of 1766

.

To: Smartypts who wrote (937)	8/24/2000 1:20:46 PM
From: WTMHouston	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1766

<<The responsibility cannot be passed to SEC so easily. >> Actually, it can. SI, as a business entity, has a business responsibility to its members-customers (us) to maintain civility at a level that protects the business -- i.e., pisses off the fewest number of people and keeps the largest number satisfied. However, SI has NO legal responsibility for the legality of third parties actions or posts. As I recall, there is a law that specifically provides as much and protects forums from legal liability. A smart attorney would not take such a case precisely because SI has no such legal liability. Have you not ever wondered why none of the recent lawsuits against internet posters include the forum where the allegedly defamatory or derogatory information was posted? Now, if you (or anyone else) wished to invest a few hundred thousand dollars in such a lawsuit, you could find an attorney to pursue it. In such a case, one could say that he had a smart attorney, based on the attorney's ability to get paid a large sum of money for a worthless lawsuit, but one would seriously have to question the intelligence of the client. I wonder how it is that you expect SI to monitor and judge the legality of posts? Should they just take your word for it? Should they have attorneys and judges on staff to make such determinations? What happens when they label something illegal and it turns out to be legal? If and when there ever is such a requirement, the quantity of legal work available will be as large as the internet itself. I sure would not mind being paid $300+ per hour to read message boards and judge the legality of posts. It seems to me like you want to shift responsibility for the content from those who create it to those who provide a medium for its dissemination. Under your analysis, and I use that loosely, the Postal Service would be liable for every letter sent through the mail, every phone company would be liable for false statements made by company officials during conference calls, and every news organization would be responsible for disseminating company news releases that later turned out to be illegal or false. The reality, however, is that you had and have no idea what you are talking about when you suggest that SI has any responsibility or liability for the content of any post. Troy