There's a lot more here too
http://www-cs-education.stanford.edu/cl ... ndex2.html
Antigen/Ginger/Cassandra:
It is one thing to provide access to the internet in which people of varying points of view may sometimes may take it upon themselves to say things that may or may not be found to be defamatory.
I agree, in the case cited in an earlier link, that the poster who sued AOL because defamatory things were posted about him, was asking for an impossible standard to be reached in expecting AOL to be monitoring all postings that they carried, all over the world, at all times, in order to remove libel about a certain person: that standard is just too much for any carrier in this age of broad internet use, at least until the person has retained counsel and given notice of libelous action.
So I think, according to the people who advise me at least, it's not surprising that the courts found AOL not responsible for such postings (especially when they were willing to remove libelous material once it was reported to them).
But on a board like this, where moderators and others (maybe yourself?) may be involved in "checking" (and sharing with favored co-actors?) IP addresses? "Outing" posters, posting or leading to the posting of personal information about them, even after the posted agreeement offers the option of posting anonymously?
I think that the average juror or judge might have a problem with the creepiness of acting like that. Especially if some harm comes to a poster because of such actions.
I have had name, address and a map to my home published repeatedly on your site. I checked a few days ago and these posts are still there. I would like them removed.
I've asked before, when I was physically threatened on this site, as was my underaged daughter, with rape and murder, and you ignored me. I believe that the poster who now goes by the name of Charly also had personal information including name of her son who has absolutely nothing to do with this site republished here. I understand that you ignored or refused her requests to remove this information. I don't know at this point how many others are in similar positions.
I am told that recently on a CEDU thread about Bill Valentine a poster who is well-known to me used my name and suggested that my son (who has never in any context had anything to do with this board) may have somehow threatened to rape that poster's wife in an anonymous posting. Just how wrong and malicious can your scummy little enterprise get?
I am tired of this. I am tired of getting reports of your co-conspirators posting terrible untrue things about me and my family.
If your site agreement had IN ANY WAY suggested that people could not actually be anonymous here, I would never had had anything to do with your miserable site. YOU had the greater knowledge about how your site works, you should have stated your true intentions in the agreement.
I want this ended. I want you to remove any information about me or my family right away. I am publically giving you notice on this since private contact has failed. Remove any posts about me or my family right now.
Anne Hall
The following quote, taken from one of your own above links, summarizes the state of the law in this regard. I'm betting that common decency will lead to precedents by which people will be held responsible for what they do to others, on the internet, as in real life, in this area is developed further.
Given who and what you are, I assume you don't think "common decency" should have much import in the outcome.
[Further, laws that hold sysops liable for their content can, by making the sysop's position a hazardous one, discourage people and organizations from taking on this role, therefore reducing the usefulness of the Internet as a forum for communication among all users. There are some who will argue that this ultimately results in an unnecessary restriction on free communication, and that sysops should therefore not be held liable for defamation or other violations on their services under any circumstances. Others, of course, argue that defamation is a serious enough problem, especially on a forum like the Internet where false information is so easily spread, that all possible efforts should be made to discourage it, and this extends to making sysops responsible for the material they make available. The issue is new enough that neither courts nor legislation have yet rendered definitive verdicts on these questions; only time will tell how they are ultimately answered].
