Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Currently, websites will allow users to say anything they want, including irresponsible defamatory content.
Who should govern whether websites allow defamatory content to be published, especially after the website is aware that content published through that website is false and defamatory?
Currently, websites such as godaddy, twitter, and wordpress take the position that as the publisher of false information, they (the website), are not liable. Websites that publish false and defamatory content (always in the US) attempt to pass the buck to the person who posts the false and defamatory connect, behaving as though the publisher is a mere bystander.
Does anyone know anything about whether US Federal law (Trump?) has this on the table, and what they are considering in terms of protecting the rights of all parties.
Anyone paying attention to this issue, and down the line, the legal interpretations and implications?
We already have laws to address slander and libel.
I'm looking for law in California regarding false and defamatory content published through Twitter, Godaddy, and Wordpress. Do you have a link?
What exactly do "slander" laws mean in California. We know that everyone is California is born covering their butt; born lying in the hope that they are not caught, so what is "slander" in California? ... you got caught slandering someone? And then? That's the most common problem on websites ... someone is caught slandering someone ... and when that is brought to the attention of the website owner, the website owner claims that they are simply the publisher and are not responsible for the content that is published.
I'm assuming that Law in California means Democrat. Are the Democrats still talking about electronic security, or are they denying that a private server in Hillary's basement to respond to secret service is a faux pas? Are the republicans any more pro-active regarding technology privacy and law?
Currently, websites will allow users to say anything they want, including irresponsible defamatory content.
Who should govern whether websites allow defamatory content to be published, especially after the website is aware that content published through that website is false and defamatory?
Currently, websites such as godaddy, twitter, and wordpress take the position that as the publisher of false information, they (the website), are not liable. Websites that publish false and defamatory content (always in the US) attempt to pass the buck to the person who posts the false and defamatory connect, behaving as though the publisher is a mere bystander.
Does anyone know anything about whether US Federal law (Trump?) has this on the table, and what they are considering in terms of protecting the rights of all parties.
Anyone paying attention to this issue, and down the line, the legal interpretations and implications?
Cheers
Defamatory, could easily be just blowing the whistle, and removing information that is just thought to be untrue, or uncomfortable for the readers to face, would be taking censorship a step too far.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
