Re: [Outside Articles on Site]

Virginia Blalock <virginia(at)visionsnet.com> wrote:

> On a site I work with(a sports site) we solicit articles from fans. Our=
 =

> policy is that these authors are responsible for their own content and =

> that  the opinions these authors express are theirs and do not reflect =

> the  opinion of the site as a whole. This is stated on our site. Is =

> there any  chance of someone who gets pissed at some opinion trying to =

> do anything  legally with to us?

Well, there's always a chance ;-)

#include stdDisclaimer.h /*IANAL, consult with Ivan or similar*/

In the US, you aren't responsible for the content on your site that is cr=
eated
by someone else *if* and only *if* you don't edit the content.  In other
words, you would be considered a common carrier, similar to the phone com=
pany.
 If I get upset at something that I hear over the phone, I cannot
(successfully) sue Ma Bell because they are a common carrier.

Things break down if you ever edit the content.

Let's say that someone posts an article that has racist content (this is =
a
hypothetical situation, mind).  If you, as an editor for the site, edit,
delete, censor, or modify in any way any part of that article, you become=

liable for all content on the site, past present and future, whether you =
wrote
it or not.  Scary, eh?

Let's make things more interesting.

Let's say that a fan writes an article that is libelous toward some team'=
s
owner (Jerry Jones is a pimp!  He does coke with Irvin!).  Jerry Jones su=
es to
have the content removed.  Are you responsible?  No.  Will your ISP yank =
your
site?  Quickly, even though there is no legal basis because you are still=
 a
common carrier.  This happens in the UK quite a bit, from what I understa=
nd
(ref this article from the beeb:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_711000/711782.stm )

To top things off, let's say that a fan writes an article that quotes
extensively from another source (paper, book, another website, what-have-=
you).
 In the US, the lawyers may make a case by siting the DMCA (Digital Mille=
nium
Cpyright Act, more info here: http://www.system.missouri.edu/ip/dmca/ ). =
 So
now you have illegal material on your website.  Are you liable?  Can you =
be
forced to take it down?  Will your ISP crumble?

Well, we don't know yet.  Slashdot may end up being the test case for thi=
s (
http://slashdot.org .  See the article here:
http://slashdot.org/features/00/05/11/0153247.shtml )  Long story short:
someone posted the spec for Microsoft's implementation of Kerberos on
Slashdot.  Microsoft's lawyers asked Slashdot to remove the post, citing =
the
DMCA.  Slashdot said no, challenging the DMCA, Microsoft's claims on the
material, and their (Slashdot's) common carrier status.

Anyway, if people post the right kind of articles, you shouldn't have too=
 much
difficulty (I leave it as an exercise to the reader to define `right').

HTH
IANAL
YMMV
TINSTAAFL
etc, etc, etc...

--Jedi Hacker(apprentice) and Code Poet

____________________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at http://webm=
ail.netscape.com.

HTML: hwg-business mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA