Collateral Censorship and the Limits of Intermediary Immunity. Collateral Censorship and the Limits of Intermediary Immunity.

Collateral Censorship and the Limits of Intermediary Immunity‪.‬

Notre Dame Law Review 2011, Nov, 87, 1

    • 22,00 kr
    • 22,00 kr

Publisher Description

The law often limits the liability of an intermediary for the speech it carries. And rightly so, because imposing liability on intermediaries can induce them to filter out questionable content and this "collateral censorship" risks suppressing much lawful, even highly beneficial, speech. The "collateral censorship" rationale has its limits, though, and correspondingly, so should the applicability of intermediary immunity. The worry with collateral censorship is not just that intermediaries censor, but that they censor more than an original speaker would in the face of potential liability. Increased censorship, in turn, is the product of applying liability targeted at original speakers to entities whose interests diverge from original speakers. Where the "intermediary" has the interests of an original speaker, and so should be regarded as one, or where the form of liability already takes into account the intermediary's interests, collateral censorship is not the problem, and immunity is not the right response. This understanding should, in particular, inform the interpretation of [section] 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, a federal statute that broadly immunizes Internet intermediaries from speech torts and many other forms of liability. In cases involving the republication of e-mails, questionnaires, member screening, and contract claims, among others, courts have begun to explore the limits of this immunity, but have done so haphazardly and inconsistently, having largely lost sight of the underlying rationale for immunity. Focusing on the conditions that generate problematic collateral censorship provides a principled basis upon which to define the limits of intermediary immunity generally, and [section] 230 in particular. INTRODUCTION

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
2011
1 November
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
102
Pages
PUBLISHER
University of Notre Dame Law School
SIZE
396
KB

More Books by Notre Dame Law Review

Scary Monsters: Hybrids, Mashups, And Other Illegitimate Children (Creativity and the Law) Scary Monsters: Hybrids, Mashups, And Other Illegitimate Children (Creativity and the Law)
2011
A Note on Incentives, Rights, And the Public Domain in Copyright Law. (Symposium: Creativity and the Law) A Note on Incentives, Rights, And the Public Domain in Copyright Law. (Symposium: Creativity and the Law)
2011
Atypical Inventions (Creativity and the Law) Atypical Inventions (Creativity and the Law)
2011
Race to Judgment? an Empirical Study of Scott V. Harris and Summary Judgment. Race to Judgment? an Empirical Study of Scott V. Harris and Summary Judgment.
2010
Does Unconscious Racial Bias Affect Trial Judges? Does Unconscious Racial Bias Affect Trial Judges?
2009
If All Politicians Are Corrupt, But All Defendants Are Presumed Innocent, Then What? A Case for Change in Honest Services Fraud Prosecutions. If All Politicians Are Corrupt, But All Defendants Are Presumed Innocent, Then What? A Case for Change in Honest Services Fraud Prosecutions.
2010