Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14
There is a law in the US that shields forums and other sites with user submitted content (i.e.: Wikipedia) from lawsuits based on the postings of users in most cases. That's how content ripoff sites like Funnyjunk survive. "It wasn't us, it was the users. We're not stealing their content, we're just profiting off of it."
Speaking of Funnyjunk, the lawyer behind that one tried suing a blogger and various commenters and got slapped down by the courts. It's happened a fair bit in the US. I have no idea how this would work in Canada though. I suspect CP is fine since they obviously took prompt action to remove, but this could be an interesting case to follow.
|
I see a lot more "opportunities" for lawyers here even in a hockey forum environment alone. Say, a poster posts a rumour about a contemplated player move that proves true. His agent (owner, manager or a player himself) takes an issue with the effect of the rumour on the outcome (positive or negative) and challenges the breach of confidentiality and process integrity within the parties involved by demanding to know who leaked the information? I'd say this COULD be perceived as a fair request by the courts. No defamation, no libel, just a rumour.