Libel on Blog Comments & Forums

From Bloomberg, California Supreme Court rules Web Publisher Isn’t Liable for Defamation.

The California Supreme Court said Internet publishers can’t be held liable if they post defamatory comments written by others, a victory for online companies like Google Inc. and Time Warner Inc.’s America Online Inc.

The court, in a unanimous decision, said those claiming defamation can only sue the original source of the allegedly offending comments, not publishers or distributors, even if the distributor is an individual. Internet users are protected by the same 1996 Communications Decency Act that grants immunity against defamation claims to publishers in most circumstances, the court said, overturning a San Francisco appeals court.

“By declaring that no `user’ may be treated as a publisher’ of third party content, Congress has comprehensively immunized republication by individual Internet users,” the court said today.

This news is very relevant to me as I have been subject to similar ~~cases~~ situations before.

In fact, my business is currently entangled in an ongoing investigation for a libel suit. Of course, I will not cower in silence so a counter-suit is in place. Can’t say more about it but will share more details once everything has been properly filed by my lawyer.

Abe Olandres

Abe is the founder and Editor-in-Chief of YugaTech with over 20 years of experience in the technology industry. He is one of the pioneers of blogging in the country and considered by many as the Father of Tech Blogging in the Philippines. He is also a technology consultant, a tech columnist with several national publications, resource speaker and mentor/advisor to several start-up companies.

https://www.yugatech.com

6 Comments

Carlo says:

18 years ago

I totally agree with the decision because publishers should never be held liable for those cases.

Comments from readers published in a certain blog/website didn’t come from the publisher and most of the time the publisher don’t personally know the person behind the comment. This is a very vague situation. Although you can hold the person who made the comment, you can’t be sure who is he/she. :)
- Reply
Nick says:

18 years ago

It just seems like a logical conclusion that if it isn’t your comment, then you shouldn’t have to be held liable.

I’m assuming the case against ploghost is regarding a website that you host. (no need to reply, there’s probably a gag order until your case is settled)

Hold up your fist and declare “power to the people”
- Reply
Manuel Viloria says:

18 years ago

I dunno… Even if it’s not your comment, the owner of a blog still has the power to delete it.

(Abe, are blog owners considered “Internet Publishers”? Or is the news item only referring to ISPs and web hosts run by individual users?)

Anyway, I wonder if this new ruling will encourage hard-to-identify flamers/defamers to post their comment in popular, high traffic blogs.

Afterall, the blog owner will not get sued, right? In addition, the blog gains additional traffic because of the ensuing drama unfolding in the Comments area.

It’s a win-win situation for both the blog owner and the third party flamer. I just wonder, though, how to establish accountability for the posted defamatory comments.
- Reply
Mike Abundo says:

18 years ago

Take that, Epixtar.
- Reply
ade says:

18 years ago

whoa.
- Reply
soegemaskineoptimering says:

15 years ago

Hey, I think your article is very interesting. I found it via Yahoo. Will definitely come back again
- Reply