Bloggers' Pundit

Automated Writing? Blogger in Draft: Introducing Google Scribe in Blogger

2011-09-07T09:20:00.000+02:00

Blogger in Draft: Introducing Google Scribe in Blogger: - Sent using Google Toolbar

Georgina Laidlaw Writes About The Five Worst Ways to Title a Blog Post

2011-08-14T20:30:00.000+02:00

Georgina Laidlaw writes about The Five Worst Ways to Title a Blog Post.

Blogging as a Catalyst for Learning

2011-08-11T11:22:00.000+02:00

"Narrate, Curate, Share:" How Blogging Can Catalyze Learning | LinkedIn: "- Sent using Google Toolbar"

BlogWorld Expo Blog — Official News Blog of the World's Largest Social Media Conference & Tradeshow

2010-10-14T03:04:00.000+02:00

BlogWorld Expo Blog — Official News Blog of the World's Largest Social Media Conference & Tradeshow: "- Sent using Google Toolbar"

Blogger Integrates Google Spam Filtering Technologies in its New Comments System

2010-08-13T23:20:00.001+02:00

Blogger has integrated Google Spam Filtering Technologies at Blogger: see Blogger Buzz: New Comments System on Blogger: "- Sent using Google Toolbar"

Blogger in Draft: Introducing Blogger Stats

2010-07-13T14:40:00.000+02:00

Blogger in Draft: Introducing Blogger Stats: "- Sent using Google Toolbar"

Blogger in Draft: The Blogger Template Designer

2010-03-27T19:43:00.000+01:00

Blogger in Draft: The Blogger Template Designer

How to Blog

2010-03-08T18:01:00.000+01:00

How to Blog

Blog-World Watch: Does Blogging Get You Google Placement

2010-03-08T17:24:00.000+01:00

Blog-World Watch: Does Blogging Get You Google Placement

Adding Buzz this Button for Blogger Blogspot Blogs | QwertyWEB

2010-02-19T14:47:00.000+01:00

Adding Buzz this Button for Blogger Blogspot Blogs | QwertyWEB

Bill Gates Joins the Blogging World - Reviews by PC Magazine

2010-01-21T16:31:00.000+01:00

Bill Gates Joins the Blogging World - Reviews by PC Magazine

EFF Law Guide for Blogs and Bloggers

2009-05-13T01:04:00.002+02:00

The EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) has a useful online

Legal Guide for Bloggers

which contains extensive FAQs (frequently asked questions [and answers]) covering blog and blogger liability and the legal rights and obligations of bloggers relating to:

IP (Copyrights, DMCA [Digital Millennium Copyright Act], Trademarks)
Right of Publicity
Defamation [and Libel]
Section 230 [see below]
Privacy
Reporter's Privilege
Election Law
Labor Law
Adult Materials [Pornography]

With respect to the above, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA), [which is part of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, see p. 78 in that linked pdf, Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC § 230)], contains a very important provision. We cite the EFF comment thereto:

Section 230 says that " "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider." This federal law preempts any state laws to the contrary: "[n]o cause of action may be brought and no liability may be imposed under any State or local law that is inconsistent with this section." The courts have repeatedly rejected attempts to limit the reach of Section 230 to "traditional" Internet service providers, instead treating many diverse entities as "interactive computer service providers."

As the EFF writes further:

"Bloggers can be both a provider and a user of interactive computer services. Bloggers are users when they create and edit blogs through a service provider, and they are providers to the extent that they allow third parties to add comments or other material to their blogs. "

"Your readers' comments, entries written by guest bloggers, tips sent by email, and information provided to you through an RSS feed would all likely be considered information provided by another content provider. This would mean that you would not be held liable for defamatory statements contained in it. However, if you selected the third-party information yourself, no court has ruled whether this information would be considered "provided" to you. One court has limited Section 230 immunity to situations in which the originator "furnished it to the provider or user under circumstances in which a reasonable person...would conclude that the information was provided for publication on the Internet...."

[See the Wikipedia for a good short discussion of the CDA as well as Section 230, and note that some but not all of the CDA has been found to be unconstitutional. Some online sources give a false impression in this regard. For CDA cases involving libel and defamation see Internet Law.]

Keep in mind that the EFF expressly states that these FAQs apply only to bloggers in the USA:

"I'm not in the United States - do these FAQs apply to me?
No. This legal guide is based on the laws in the United States, where there is a strong constitutional protection for speech. Many other countries do not have strong protections, making it easier to sue for speech. (See, for example, the BBC's guide, How to Avoid Libel and Defamation.) However, US courts are reluctant to enforce foreign judgments that would restrict your freedom of speech. So if you are sued in the United Kingdom for defamation, you might lose your UK case, but the winner would have a hard time collecting in the United States. If you know of a similar guide for your own jurisdiction or feel inspired to research and write one, please let us know. We can link to it here. We don't have the expertise or resources to speak to other countries' legal traditions, but we'd like to work with those who do. "

Technorati Tags:

blogs, bloggers, blogger liability, blog liability, defamation, libel, EFF, legal guide, law guide, law, legal, Telecommunications Act, CDA, Communications Decency Act, indecent, obscene, obscenity, labor law, election law, reporter's privilege, LawPundit, Section 230, right of publicity, trademarks, copyrights, adult materials, pornography.

Reposted from LawPundit.

Legal Implications of Blogging

2009-05-13T01:02:00.000+02:00

Legal Implications of Blogging

The Blogbook has a link to an article by Pejman Yousefzadeh at TCS (Tech Central Station) on the legal implications of blogging entitled "The Next Litigation Battleground" (see also his blog, Pejmanesque). The article was also picked up by The Blog Herald.

Generally instructive on this specific topic of internet libel is a posting by Eugene Volokh on the decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the Batzel case, rehearing denied, involving an interpretation of 47 U.S.C. § 230 (section 230).

See in this connection my lengthy posting on libel slander defamation and blogs where it is discussed that bloggers should be careful about what they post or allow as comments on their blog pages until the blogger liability issue is firmly settled in the law.

Since the issue of blogger liability is very important, below is a list of blog links about internet libel:

1. via Instapundit - update here - to the Kausfiles and an October 28, 2003 article entitled "The Case Against Editors: Why it still pays to not have one" which points to a posting by Eugene Volokh discussing the difference between libel and slander, who further links to his own May 12, 2002 article in TCS entitled "The Future of Internet Speech", which points out that 1st Amendment rights to free speech under the US Constitution have limits and are supplemented by the laws of the various states (e.g. on such issues as retraction).

2. Howard Bashman, in How Appealing links to other blog sites commenting on libel, and comments the 9th Circuit decision in Batzel, including the dissent, which raises serious legal issues. See the dissent of Judge Ronald Gould at dissent from denial of rehearing en banc in Batzel v. Cramers. Marty Lederman at SCOTUS links to this dissent for another "historical" reason - the citing of law blogs (blawgs) in a judicial opinion.

3. A Small Victory has some interesting mostly non-legal comment on the libel issue.

Reposted from LawPundit.

Libel Slander Defamation and Blogs

2009-05-13T00:55:00.001+02:00

Libel Slander Defamation and Blogs

Stuart Levine in his Tax & Business Law Commentary has an October 30, 2003 posting entitled: " Don't Say I Didn't Warn Ya' ", referring to a potential libel case involving two blogs.

Libel, slander and defamation are always possible problems when we exercise our first amendment right to free speech and freedom of the press, both of which are not without limit. There are and must be bounds for everything in law.

Definitions of Libel Slander and Defamation

Essentially, defamation is an "attack" on the reputation of a person. It is called libel if it is in writing and is known as slander if it is spoken.

Explanations of Libel Slander and Defamation

See the following pages for more general orientation, definitions and explanation of the above-mentioned and associated terms:
Libel Defense Resource Center - includes an online 50-State survey of libel law
The First Amendment Handbook by The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press - it treats libel in depth as it affects the media
What is Libel? - short description from writing-world.com
Puerto Rico Criminal Libel Law Struck Down as violating the 1st Amendment (February 4, 2003)
Terms associated with libel cases
Defenses to claims of libel
Privilege and claims of libel
Libel laws generally in some countries other than the US: the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, France, Germany

Liability Insurance for Defamation

If you are a blogger, make sure you have the right liability insurance,
as discussed by Attorney Ivan Hoffman,
and watch your words.

Online Liability for Defamation

Links to the fledgling law of "online liability" are found at:
The First Amendment Center
in an article by Jarrod F. Reich, "Internet & First Amendment: Online Libel" (Reich is still a law student at Vanderbilt)

There seems to be no question that every blogger is liable for what he or she writes on a blog.

Who May be Excluded from Liability

A the same time, the operating website, e.g. blogger.com, typepad.com, or radiouserland.com are seemingly thus far NOT liable for what YOU post online to your blog on those sites, at least based on the following commentary:

In a November 7, 2003 article by Douglas Lee, an Illinois attorney, entitled, "Obscure Internet libel provision hits the big time", Lee discusses Section 230(c) of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 as interpreted by the 9th Circuit in Batzel v. Smith where a 2-1 court decision provides virtual libel immunity to website operators (as opposed to those who have actually written the materials).

What about bloggers who post 3rd-party materials to their blog, i.e. materials they have not written themselves, but which are libelous. Can they be held liable for this material?

As written by the Associated Press at "Bloggers win Libel Protection", Eric Brown, who represented the winning defendent in the suit at Batzel v. Smith, stated:
"It clarifies the existing law..... It expands it in the sense that no court had really addressed bloggers, list serve operators and those people yet, certainly not on the level of the 9th Circuit Court."

No Blogger Immunity - Bloggers CAN Be Sued For Libel

But there should be no blogger euphoria over Batzel v. Smith, nor does the case grant bloggers immunity,
according to the postings of Balkinization ("Can Bloggers be Sued for libel? - Of course they can"), Inter Alia and Unintended Consequences.

Read particularly what Balkin writes. I often do not agree with him on his political postings, but in his legal analysis he is simply superb.

Reposted from LawPundit.