Re: Internet Credibility and Impact

[Richard Welty <rwelty@domain.elided>]

At 01:43 AM 9/18/98 -0600, Bill Thebert wrote:

>I've rambled on long enough here -- but the issue I think is clear:  am I
>"responsible" for the CONTENT of a forum that I provide and make available?
> Does Richard feel responsible for the CONTENT of the speech that passes
>through the Digest?  Are there simple "rules" that I can make and enforce
>that will make the process more fair and "self-moderating"? (e.g., no
>comments posted without REAL name, e-mail address & phone number of the
>poster).

i have recent, pertinent experience.

for any business that meets the definition of Internet Service Provider
there are directly relevant federal laws -- and krusty motorsports meets
that definition, although krusty has never called itself such -- but krusty
does provide internet services such as email/telnet accounts, web hosting,
and electronic mailing list hosting.

when the CDA was struck down, the entire CDA was not struck down. the only
portions struck down were those that unconstitutionally restricted free
speech. other sections remained in effect. in particular, 47 USC section
230(c)(1) is critical: "[n]o 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". the relevant cases are
Zeran v. America OnLine, Inc., 129 F.3d 327 (4th Circuit 1997) and
Blumenthal v. Drudge, 992 F Supp. 44 (D.D.C. 1998).

this is all cribbed from the letter my lawyer sent last week with respect
to krusty's current "legal adventures".

as a result, providers of services are protected. the problem on the net,
and it is a tricky one, is that there is little real authentication unless
we all start PGP signing everything we send.

richard