I don't think it's the permanence that changes things, it's the visibility. This is what confused me most about the whole case. As the article says: "Many oth

I don't think it's the permanence that changes things, it's the visibility. This is what confused me most about the whole case. As the article says: "Many other websites control extremely salacious material either by using special coding to keep it to themselves (so that Google doesn’t pick it up)..." The major issue wasn't merely that there were false statements being issued, but that they were high on the Google results for the laywers' names. Why didn't the website merely turn off Google indexing for the problem forums?