<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="2.0">
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Online Liability Blog™</title>
	
	<link>http://onlineliabilityblog.com</link>
	<description>Laws and litigation that regulate, challenge and immunize Internet websites and other online services</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2009 18:42:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog" type="application/rss+xml" /><feedburner:emailServiceId>CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog</feedburner:emailServiceId><feedburner:feedburnerHostname>http://feedburner.google.com</feedburner:feedburnerHostname><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com" /><item>
		<title>Comment on Ninth Circuit: Roommates.com largely unprotected by Section 230 by Michael Erdman</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog/~3/odV19Axy5-U/</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Erdman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2009 18:42:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlineliabilityblog.wordpress.com/?p=146#comment-782</guid>
		<description>I'm afraid not Bill.  You might check Eric Goldman's &lt;a href="http://blog.ericgoldman.org/" rel="nofollow"&gt;Technology and Marketing Law Blog&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m afraid not Bill.  You might check Eric Goldman&#8217;s <a href="http://blog.ericgoldman.org/" rel="nofollow">Technology and Marketing Law Blog</a>.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog/~4/odV19Axy5-U" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://onlineliabilityblog.com/2008/04/03/ninth-circuit-roommatescom-largely-unprotected-by-section-230/#comment-782</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Ninth Circuit: Roommates.com largely unprotected by Section 230 by bill</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog/~3/rhXN-XHHomM/</link>
		<dc:creator>bill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Jul 2009 23:49:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlineliabilityblog.wordpress.com/?p=146#comment-779</guid>
		<description>is there any update to this post?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>is there any update to this post?</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog/~4/rhXN-XHHomM" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://onlineliabilityblog.com/2008/04/03/ninth-circuit-roommatescom-largely-unprotected-by-section-230/#comment-779</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on YouTube wins on personal jurisdiction, venue arguments in Washington state by Victoria S. Bowen</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog/~3/K94hivzmo-M/</link>
		<dc:creator>Victoria S. Bowen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 12:48:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlineliabilityblog.wordpress.com/?p=147#comment-773</guid>
		<description>I accidentally ran across this blog on the case I filed by mistake in Washington.  I only paid $300 to file the case and was not willing to hire a lawyer.  I was simply trying to make YT aware of the extent of the bullying I received on YT because I am androgynous and ugly.  I had wished to strike a spark of humanity because of the deeply disturbing comments in emails and death threats received with a satellite picture of where I lived.  It took me three months to realize The Untouchable Psychopath was not going to physically harass me.  I didn't know.  In the response from Judge Burgess, the problem of having to file DMCA's infinitely to get copyright laws enforced - I filed over 20 on the same video - was I was merely annoyed of having to follow the procedure in place.  I had nothing better to do with my time than filing DMCA's over and over and over and over.  YT is a cold, depressing and damaging place for people who thought YT was going to be a place for EVERYONE to express themselves.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I accidentally ran across this blog on the case I filed by mistake in Washington.  I only paid $300 to file the case and was not willing to hire a lawyer.  I was simply trying to make YT aware of the extent of the bullying I received on YT because I am androgynous and ugly.  I had wished to strike a spark of humanity because of the deeply disturbing comments in emails and death threats received with a satellite picture of where I lived.  It took me three months to realize The Untouchable Psychopath was not going to physically harass me.  I didn&#8217;t know.  In the response from Judge Burgess, the problem of having to file DMCA&#8217;s infinitely to get copyright laws enforced &#8211; I filed over 20 on the same video &#8211; was I was merely annoyed of having to follow the procedure in place.  I had nothing better to do with my time than filing DMCA&#8217;s over and over and over and over.  YT is a cold, depressing and damaging place for people who thought YT was going to be a place for EVERYONE to express themselves.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog/~4/K94hivzmo-M" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://onlineliabilityblog.com/2008/04/22/youtube-wins-on-personal-jurisdiction-venue-arguments-in-washington-state/#comment-773</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Regulation of Online Intrastate Gambling by megan</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog/~3/61GHYfC7rd4/</link>
		<dc:creator>megan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:50:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlineliabilityblog.com/2007/10/12/regulation-of-online-intrastate-gambling/#comment-760</guid>
		<description>we are still hoping that the bill on online gambling be raised up  - http://cyberarts.com/articles_online_gambling_jurisdictions.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>we are still hoping that the bill on online gambling be raised up  &#8211; <a href="http://cyberarts.com/articles_online_gambling_jurisdictions.html" rel="nofollow">http://cyberarts.com/articles_online_gambling_jurisdictions.html</a></p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog/~4/61GHYfC7rd4" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://onlineliabilityblog.com/2007/10/12/regulation-of-online-intrastate-gambling/#comment-760</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Seventh Circuit considers whether Section 230 protects Craigslist from Fair Housing Act claims by Michael Erdman</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog/~3/hzWWcMvd6xA/</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Erdman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Feb 2009 16:34:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlineliabilityblog.wordpress.com/?p=128#comment-751</guid>
		<description>Please see my subsequent post on the 7th Circuit's ruling.  -Michael</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Please see my subsequent post on the 7th Circuit&#8217;s ruling.  -Michael</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog/~4/hzWWcMvd6xA" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://onlineliabilityblog.com/2008/02/15/seventh-circuit-considers-whether-section-230-protects-craigslist-from-fair-housing-act-claims/#comment-751</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Seventh Circuit considers whether Section 230 protects Craigslist from Fair Housing Act claims by phoneverifiedcraigslistaccounts</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog/~3/4c5jowh90g0/</link>
		<dc:creator>phoneverifiedcraigslistaccounts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Feb 2009 11:12:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlineliabilityblog.wordpress.com/?p=128#comment-749</guid>
		<description>What was the outcome of this anyway?
&lt;a href="http://www.phoneverifiedaccounts.net" rel="nofollow"&gt;Craigslist Phone Verified Accounts&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What was the outcome of this anyway?<br />
<a href="http://www.phoneverifiedaccounts.net" rel="nofollow">Craigslist Phone Verified Accounts</a></p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog/~4/4c5jowh90g0" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://onlineliabilityblog.com/2008/02/15/seventh-circuit-considers-whether-section-230-protects-craigslist-from-fair-housing-act-claims/#comment-749</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Seventh Circuit considers whether Section 230 protects Craigslist from Fair Housing Act claims by Craigslist Proxy</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog/~3/XFX-sYmBjdM/</link>
		<dc:creator>Craigslist Proxy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 11:41:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlineliabilityblog.wordpress.com/?p=128#comment-739</guid>
		<description>Well, is anyone or any business really safe these days?  Things can get dragged through court no matter what.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, is anyone or any business really safe these days?  Things can get dragged through court no matter what.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog/~4/XFX-sYmBjdM" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://onlineliabilityblog.com/2008/02/15/seventh-circuit-considers-whether-section-230-protects-craigslist-from-fair-housing-act-claims/#comment-739</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Seventh Circuit considers whether Section 230 protects Craigslist from Fair Housing Act claims by Craigslist Proxy</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog/~3/tM5M6AAkvx0/</link>
		<dc:creator>Craigslist Proxy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Oct 2008 11:15:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlineliabilityblog.wordpress.com/?p=128#comment-724</guid>
		<description>Great post, I\'ll keep coming back to check on updates!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post, I\&#8217;ll keep coming back to check on updates!</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog/~4/tM5M6AAkvx0" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://onlineliabilityblog.com/2008/02/15/seventh-circuit-considers-whether-section-230-protects-craigslist-from-fair-housing-act-claims/#comment-724</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Fifth Circuit issues its first Section 230 opinion by Michael Erdman</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog/~3/NPzIKeMzDjM/</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Erdman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 03:26:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlineliabilityblog.wordpress.com/?p=150#comment-697</guid>
		<description>Thanks Evan.  I'd nearly forgotten my password it had been so long.  How lame is that?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Evan.  I&#8217;d nearly forgotten my password it had been so long.  How lame is that?</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog/~4/NPzIKeMzDjM" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://onlineliabilityblog.com/2008/06/24/fifth-circuit-issues-its-first-section-230-opinion/#comment-697</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Fifth Circuit issues its first Section 230 opinion by Evan</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog/~3/i4Pqav5xV3c/</link>
		<dc:creator>Evan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 03:08:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlineliabilityblog.wordpress.com/?p=150#comment-696</guid>
		<description>Glad to see you're back posting!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Glad to see you&#8217;re back posting!</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForOnlineLiabilityBlog/~4/i4Pqav5xV3c" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://onlineliabilityblog.com/2008/06/24/fifth-circuit-issues-its-first-section-230-opinion/#comment-696</feedburner:origLink></item>
</channel>
</rss>
