Cybertelecom
Cybertelecom
Federal Internet Law & Policy
An Educational Project

Good Samaritan Reference 47 USC § 230

Dont be a FOOL; The Law is Not DIY
- Good Samaritan Defense
- 3rd Party Content
- Internet Access Liability
- Foreign Judgments
- References


- 1st Amend
- Crime
- CDA
- COPA
- CIPA
- CPPA
- Child Porn
- Child Porn, Reporting
- Protect Act
- Filters
- - Notification
- V Chip
- Taxes
- Reports
- Obscenity
- Annoy
- ISP
- Good Samaritan Defense

Law

Caselaw

Appeals Court

DC Circuit

10th Circuit

9th Circuit

7th Circuit

  • Chicago Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Inc. v. craigslist, Inc., No. 07-1101 (7th Cir. Mar. 14, 2008) ("the Seventh Circuit held the online classified website craigslist immune from liability for discriminatory housing advertisements submitted by users. Craigslist’s service works very much like the “Additional Comments” section of Roommate’s website, in that users are given an open text prompt in which to enter any description of the rental property without any structure imposed on their content or any requirement to enter discriminatory information: Nothing in the service craigslist offers induces anyone to post any particular listing or express a preference for discrimination . . . .” Slip op. at 9." Roommates.com, p. 3470, n. 33, 9th Cir. 2008.)

6th Circuit

5th Circuit

  • Doe v. MySpace Inc.PDF, 2008 WL 2068064 (5th Cir. May 10, 2008) (defendant not liable for failure to to institute adequate safety measures to prevent sexual predators)

4th Circuit

3rd Circuit

  • DiMeo v. Max , 2007 WL 2717865 (3rd Cir. 2007)
    • Finding defendant not liable for comments left by third parties on a blog - Slip 4: "Max's website [Blog] is an interactive computer service because it enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server. See 47 U.S.C. § 230(f)(2) . . . DiMeo's complaint alleges that Max is a publisher of the comments on the website. However, DiMeo does not allege that Max authored the comments on the website or that he is an information content provider. See 47 U.S.C. § 230 (f)(3) . . . As such, the website posts alleged in the complaint must constitute information furnished by third party information content providers."
    • Third Circuit affirms Dimeo v. Max - Section 230 immunity applies to forum board operator, Internet Cases 11/13/2007
    • DiMeo v. Max Affirmed by Third Circuit, Tech and Marketing Law Blog (Sept 24, 2007) ("The only "remarkable" aspect is that the Third Circuit--fortunately--doesn't cite to the Roommates.com opinion at all.")
    • Court upholds dismissal of suit over Web site postings Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (Sept 28, 20007)
  • Green v. America Online, 318 F.3d 465 (3d Cir. 2003), , cert denied, 540 US 877 (2003). (In a case involving comments in a chat room, "The court reasoned that Green was attempting "to hold AOL liable for decisions relating to the monitoring, screening, and deletion of content from its network - actions quintessentially related to a publisher's role. Section 230 'specifically proscribes liability' in such circumstances."")

1st Circuit

  • Universal Communication Systems, Inc. v. Lycos, Inc. , 2007 WL 549111 (1st Cir. Feb. 23, 2007) Lycos Not Liable for Objectionable Message Board Posting
    • "In Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA), 47 U.S.C. § 230, Congress has granted broad immunity to entities, such as Lycos, that facilitate the speech of others on the Internet. Whatever the limits of that immunity, it is clear that Lycos's activities in this case fall squarely within those that Congress intended to immunize. UCS attempted to plead around this Section 230 statutory immunity by asserting that Lycos did not qualify for immunity and that UCS's claims fell within certain exceptions to that immunity. The district court rejected these arguments and dismissed the claims against Lycos and Terra Networks for failure to state a claim. We agree and affirm the dismissals, joining the other courts that have uniformly given effect to Section 230 in similar circumstances."

District Court

State Courts

Papers

Links

Attorneys General

Backpage.com & InternetArchive.com

Additionally the Act is inconsistent with Section 230 of the CDA because it criminalizes the "knowing" publication, dissemination, or display of specified content. As Judge Martinez found in McKenna, "in doing so, it creates an incentive for online service providers not to monitor the content that passes through its channels. This was precisely the situation that the CDA was enacted to remedy." McKenna, 881 F. Supp. 2d at 1273 (internal citations omitted)."

Craigslist

News

© Cybertelecom ::