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.

Technology Stocks : InfoSpace (INSP): Where GNET went! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bundashus who wrote (4998)	5/2/1999 7:06:00 PM
From: RTev	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 28311

How can GNET be held liable for postings that allegedly where posted by someone else? It's a confused set of rulings, and I don't think there's ever been a unifying Supreme Court case on the issues. As I recall, a distinction is made in some cases between an actively managed discussion and one that is passively provided. Here are some discussions the issues: mbnet.mb.ca cyberlibel.com./liabilit.html A relevant portion from the last item: ...the owner and/or operator of the computer may be liable, but only if: i) they or their agents knew that the material was defamatory; or ii) they or their agents had reason to be suspicious that some or all of the material was defamatory. The nature and previous history of the newsgroup or mailing group where the defamatory material was posted, the previous history of the person posting the message, and reading the defamatory material are all factors which might spark the suspicions of owners and/or operators. And a summary of a poster's legal responsibility: alumni.caltech.edu SI could be considered actively managed -- a "publisher" -- since GNET employees monitor and sometimes delete messages for various reasons. That might open them to greater liability for libelous statements, but it gets very murky. It depends mostly on the policies of SI and the reaction of SI to the posts. What are the bases used for deleting posts? Were the posts that are subject of this suit deleted?