Citizen Media Law Project’s recent article “Just Say No to the Sewer: Section 230 No Obstacle to Editing Comments” once again delves into what seems to be the most misunderstood – and at the same time most useful liability shields for website operators.
As CMLP notes:
“Today, it’s settled law that website operators are protected even if they change the content of users’ postings. The leading case interpreting Section 230, Zeran v. America Online, Inc., 129 F.3d 327, 330 (4th Cir. 1997), held that “lawsuits seeking to hold a service provider liable for its exercise of a publisher’s traditional editorial functions — such as deciding whether to publish, withdraw, postpone or alter content — are barred” (emphasis added). Since Zeran, numerous courts have reaffirmed the principle. The Ninth Circuit, in Batzel v. Smith, 333 F.3d 1018 (9th Cir. 2003), held that “minor alterations” did not cost a website operator his immunity when posting another’s email message.”
So what about the limits?
CMLP notes: “Section 230′s broad grant of immunity does have its limits. Most critically, it won’t help you if you change a comment in a way that creates defamatory meaning that wasn’t there before.”
So what about sites like The Salty Droid? What’s going on there?
My guess is one of three things – after all the owner does claim to be a lawyer, so is likely relying on:
1) Truth As An Absolute Defense to Defamation – visit Electronic Frontier Foundation’s guide on defamation here for details.
Of note is the following from their Blogger’s Legal Guide:
“Is there a difference between reporting on public and private figures?
2) The “Acorn Blunder Effect”
OK. I don’t know if there’s a real name for this, but it is used by law enforcement at times…it has to do with the consequences of filing lawsuits that will lead to virtually unlimited discovery that was discussed in CMLP’s commentary on the lawsuit called “I Can Clearly See You’re Nuts: Acorn’s Insane Civil Suite” in which CMLP points out…
“The American system allows for liberal discovery requests for the parties in civil litigation. Now recall that ACORN has been the subject of numerous controversies, including claims of embezzlement and voter registration fraud. And the other parties in this case are FILMMAKERS and an ONLINE MEDIA OUTLET. Does ACORN really have nothing to hide?”
3) Some legal stuff about just spouting off “opinions”
There’s some legal stuff about people just spouting off “opinions” not being held to the same standard as “defamation” that I don’t really understand, so I don’t have any great references for that.
So, when The Droid makes posts like StomperNet Shit Storm or Inside Dot Con Secrets – don’t think for a moment he or she is doing it for fear of facing a “legal battle”. After all, it seems like it would be super-easy to take care of that through a lawsuit and formal discovery process.
The more likely scenario is that he or she knows that when it comes to the risks of such potential lawsuits – the odds are stacked in his or her favor as to what each party has to gain or lose.
Just as former World Chess champion Tigran Petrosian (The Iron Tiger) demonstrated time and time again:
“Often the best offense is a great defense”…and “he only attacked when he felt secure and his greatest strength was in defence.” (Botvinnik)
Related: