5 ms·

I don't think the law of libel works that way.

• asperous 13y ago
  "Congress specifically enacted 47 U.S.C. § 230 (1996) to reverse the Prodigy findings and to provide for private blocking and screening of offensive material. § 230(c) states "that no provider or user of an interactive computer shall be treated as a publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider," thereby providing forums immunity for statements provided by third parties." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law
  • dlitz 13y ago
    47 U.S.C. § 230 (1996) basically covers online forums from being responsible for what other people post on those forums. From what I can tell, it doesn't necessarily protect a person who uses one of those forums to post libelous claims, just because that person cites another source. Arguably, the law could be read that way, but I would be surprised if the courts actually interpreted the immunity as broadly as you're describing it---that would pretty much gut libel law altogether. Do you have any case law to support your interpretation?
    • asperous 13y ago
      Yes. I should say that the law is specific for users of an interactive computer. "arguing that only the originator of a defamatory statement published on the internet could be held liable.[4][9][10][11]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrett_v._Rosenthal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrett_v._Rosenthal