This is all conjecture because I don't know the structure of TD, but I don't think it limits the admins from doing anything.

I think it shields TigerDroppings under whatever legal entity Chicken has it (LLC or whatnot) from (in this case) the girl who was the subject of the thread last night suing TigerDroppings as an entity for the stuff that was posted in that thread last night.

That law pretty much makes interactive websites (go to the link and read about the early cases involving AOL) almost a liability-free conduit of information. Meaning the websites are simply the medium by which information is exchanged and the posters or submitters of that information are liable for the content and not the website itself.

Again, this is all in very general terms. That law was passed in the early days of the Internet to shield the big internet companies (think AOL chat rooms) from lawsuits based on what individuals posted.

This post was edited on 1/22/14 at 4:09 pm

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by lighter345

Member since Jan 2009

11865 posts

Posted on 1/22/14 at 4:12 pm to TheLankiestLawyer

Did you read what is happening with thedirty.com and that Bengals cheerleader though?

It seems the CDA may not be as clad proof as it once was.

quote:
This case has created a buzz in the reputation management industry, since it was the first time CDA was not accepted as a defense. The main reason of the judge not allowing the CDA as a defense is believed to be the fact that Richie acts as an editor of all content posted on the website and often modifies or adds his own comments. It is thought that the success of this lawsuit would open the doors to a flood of similar lawsuits.[16][17]

LINK

2 ...

Report Post

Help Board - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board