Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!plaid!chuq From: chuq%plaid@Sun.COM (Chuq Von Rospach) Newsgroups: news.admin,misc.legal Subject: Re: Responsibility for postings. Message-ID: <30227@sun.uucp> Date: Wed, 7-Oct-87 12:28:56 EDT Article-I.D.: sun.30227 Posted: Wed Oct 7 12:28:56 1987 Date-Received: Sat, 10-Oct-87 08:30:24 EDT References: <378d6016.b8ab@apollo.uucp> <5261@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> Sender: news@sun.uucp Reply-To: chuq@sun.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach) Organization: Fictional Reality, uLtd Lines: 74 Xref: mnetor news.admin:1120 misc.legal:3015 >In my humble (i.e., not $200 per hour) opinion, Mr. Berch, Chuq Von >Rospach (chuq@sun.COM, in his recent article <30049@sun.uucp>), and others >are overlooking something serious. >While the author of an allegedly libelous article might be anonymous, >or difficult to find, the sites are neither anonymous nor (in general) >difficult to find! That's not strictly true. The ability to prove the origin of a message (either site OR poster) is impossible on the network. It is possible to create forged messages that show no trace of origin. Without such an audit trail, you can't prove without doubt that the message actually came from where it claims to have come without an admission by the actual poster. For proof, see the continuing running joke of messages from 'moscvax" and its variant each April. Or you can ask Mark Horton where that message in mod.announce came from last April (hint: it wasn't from him). If anyone wants definite proof of this, I'll happily post a message from the (fictitious!) account/site of your choice to this group. I can even route it through sri lanka or perhaps one of the research camps in antartica if you want... >If Mr. Lippman were a litigious person, it is very possible that he >might file suit against not just the site that originated the offending >article, but against *all* sites on the USENET that carried *any* of the >newsgroups that contained the article in question. I wasn't ignoring this, as was claimed above. This is, in fact, a major concern. If a site is considered to be publishing, then all other sites may well be considered to be 'distributors' in the same flavor as a book distributor or a bookstore might -- and there are circumstances where a bookstore has been held liable for (primarily obscene) material in their shop. In most cases, however, it doesn't stick and I don't know of a single case where a distributor has been held to any liability in a libel case. On the other hand, if the net is considered a common carrier (and my belief is that it would) then there is no liability, because the network does not have any input or control of the programming -- they distribute it with their eyes closed, in other words. The only liability is with the people/organization that generated the programming -- and as I've mentioned above, proof of the generation would be difficult to impossible. Tough calls on all sides. The bottom line, as I see it (and remember, I'm just a very interested layman who's done research) is this: we have absolutely no idea how the court will REALLY judge a case like this. There are no precedents. We can make educated guesses, but the courts are notoriously unreliable about acting intelligently, especially when high technology and unfamiliar territory is reached. We want to avoid setting precedents to the greatest extend possible. They are expensive, time consuming, and don't really solve anything. Worse, the network exists on good faith and a lot of handwaving. What do you think the FIRST thing any company will do if its lawyer gets a lawsuit over some network the corporation doesn't even know exists? It will pull the plug. No company in its right mind will spend lots of money trying to protect USENET. It'll pull out and try to cuts its losses. If the companies that hold the net together start pulling out, the net dies. I think it is in everyone's best interest to avoid that. chuq -- Chuq Von Rospach chuq@sun.COM Editor, OtherRealms Delphi: CHUQ Bye bye life! Bye bye happiness! Hello, loneliness, I think I'm gonna die. Chuq Von Rospach chuq@sun.COM Editor, OtherRealms Delphi: CHUQ Bye bye life! Bye bye happiness! Hello, loneliness, I think I'm gonna die.