| |
In lugnet.lego.direct, Tim Wilkins writes:
> In lugnet.lego.direct, Todd Lehman writes:
> It can also open you up to legal issues.
>
>
> By the way what are the legal issues ?
One of them I have heard of is the distinction between an open forum and an
edited publication. In an open forum, slander or libel is not the fault of the
proprietor, but an edited one creates an expectation of an editorial standard
and the editor stands responsible for what is published. Prodigy was in court
over this in 1991 because they heavily patroled their online service. Since they
were imposing an editorial standard they became liable for lapses. So if someone
posted pornographic material on Prodigy that offended some local law somewhere
and they didn't take steps, Prodigy was liable. Many people assumed the
corollary, that if you were running an open forum then you could disclaim
liability, but I doubt it. I'm not sure the Supreme Court ruling on the CDA
clarified this very much. ISPs now try to steer clear of any presumption of an
editorial standard, intervening only where some law is being broken by a user.
And I'm not a lawyer.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: 2001 Set info
|
| In lugnet.lego.direct, Todd Lehman writes: It can also open you up to legal issues. By the way what are the legal issues ? I printed out the new set Information when it briefly appeared on the Lego Site I could scan it and publish it in Lugnet. Is (...) (24 years ago, 9-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
176 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
