Bloggers' Immunity Upheld

"Internet users and providers cannot be held liable for posting libelous material written by someone else, the California Supreme Court ruled unanimously today." So reports the L.A. Times.

Now before you people out there think that means YOU have immunity to commit defamation, think again. It means that we, the Mayor Sam operators, as users and providers, are not liable for your defamation.

You remain liable for libel you commit. And we would be liable for ours, if we ever engaged in libel.

Here's the operative language from the federal statute in issue, as explained by the Court:

In the Communications Decency Act of 1996, Congress declared: “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.” (47 U.S.C. § 230(c)(1).) “No cause of action may be brought and no liability may be imposed under any State or local law that is inconsistent with this section.” (§ 230(e)(3).)

So be nice, or at least be accurate.

Here's the article: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-ex-internet112006,0,2867393.story?coll=la-home-headlines

Here's the case, namely, Barrett v. Rosenthal: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S122953.PDF.