Law Commons^™

An Interpretive Framework For Narrower Immunity Under Section 230 Of The Communications Decency Act, Gregory M. Dickinson

Gregory M Dickinson

Almost all courts to interpret Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act have construed its ambiguously worded immunity provision broadly, shielding Internet intermediaries from tort liability so long as they are not the literal authors of offensive content. Although this broad interpretation effects the basic goals of the statute, it ignores several serious textual difficulties and mistakenly extends protection too far by immunizing even direct participants in tortious conduct.

This analysis, which examines the text and history of Section 230 in light of two strains of pre-Internet vicarious liability defamation doctrine, concludes that the immunity provision of Section 230, though …

Asking For It: A Grokster-Based Approach To Internet Sites That Distribute Offensive Content, Zac Locke

Zac Locke

Anyone connected to the Internet can post their words, images and any other expression to millions of sites online. However, these sites are also available to tortfeasors and criminals such as defamers, sexual predators, and child pornographers. These individuals rely on interactive computer services (“ICSs”), such as Internet service providers, search engines, social networking sites, video sharing sites, and chat rooms, to disseminate their illegal and offensive messages. The fact that torts and crimes such as defamation, predation and child pornography happen in cyberspace instead of on a street corner does not shield speakers from liability for their actions. However, …