Thanks for the info, even since the Communication Acts of 1996, the courts have further given media defendants (this includes websites) heightened protection under the First Amendment.
The Communications Decency Act or the First Amendment immunize hosting, ISP, providers of liable actions as to do so would be to hold them liable for content originated by third parties.
As for those posting the messages, this has been the finding in most cases involving attempts to sue or take acton against someone posting or hosting sites that post public opinions/comments :
Quote:
Banco Nacional de Mexico, S.A. v. Menendez-Rodgriguez, et al-The court also held that the nature of the comments in question were matters of public concern.
The court ruled that because the matters in question were of public concern, the plaintiff, to prevail on his defamation claim, must prove both that the statements in question were false and were made with actual malice - that is with knowledge that the statements in question were false, or made with reckless disregard for the truth
|
A heavy burden for those filing suit to prove. I have a friend that attended Stetson Law School to specialize in internet law and intellectual properties that has been involved in attempted libel or deflamation actions. In many cases, the non prevailing party has to bear the cost of the prevailing parties' actions. That means, the person who thought they were slandered had to pay both attorney's fees and court cost!
It a sad fact as you say, anyone can sue anyone and always find an attonrey willing to do it...... he has nothing to lose and only gains no matter the outcome.