Why Bloggers Aren't Liable For Republishing Defamatory Articles

As Blogging Journalist readers probably know by now, the California Supreme Court on November 20, 2006, issued a  41-page opinion in Stephen J, Barrett, et al v. Ilena Rosenthal that says bloggers and other online publishers cannot be held liable for republishing defamatory material. The court overturned this opinion.

 The court based its opinion on the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which says:

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).)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).)

The court said "These provisions have been widely and consistently interpreted to confer broad immunity against defamation liability for those who use the Internet to publish information that originated from another source. The immunity has been applied regardless of the traditional distinction between “publishers” and “distributors.”

Note: Links to Supreme Court opinion cited above and the Communications Decency Act are courtesy of The Jurist.