Avoiding liability when it comes to forums?

[Maxwell]

I have had numerous ideas for sites that could make great money.

I even went ahead and had one developed... but once I had sought legal advice, I found that the liability that arises from users communicating is far too substantial to bear.

It never struck me to go asking anybody on Dnforum about how those operating sites of this nature overcome such liability.

So I guess I'm going ahead with it now... anybody have any advice as to how to absolve myself/my corporation of any liability when it comes to sites that involve user interaction such as forums?

[DutchBoyd]

That's a tough one, man, because as a forum operator you are basically a publisher... I've actually been looking at this very thing... trying to find federal laws to see if there is anything that shields forum operators from criminal or civil liability. What I've found is that there really aren't any federal laws out there that you are going to be able to rely on as a forum operator. If someone has found anything different that WOULD shield a forum operator, I'd be very interested to hear it as well.

I think most criminal laws out there are (though they'll be state by state) are going to include some sort of intent requirement, so as long as you delete any illegal posts as soon as you are aware of them you probably won't run afoul of a criminal law. But if your site is specifically targetted towards some sort of illegal communication (warezforum, illegalpornforum, weedsellingforum etc.), you're not going to have plausible deniability when it comes to intending to publish illegal material.

Bottom line : you should probably think twice about developing a forum site if the subject matter of the forum is questionable enough for you to have already consulted legal advice.

[cbk]

Prior to the Communications Decency Act, if you moderated your user-submitted content in any way, you were legally considered to have editorial control over the content and thus be liable for it. Obviously it makes no sense to penalize forum owners in this way. So the "Good Samaritan" clause was enacted into law, and it states:

1. 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.

2. No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of –

a) Any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected; or

b) Any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or others the technical means to restrict access to material described in paragraph (1)


Set it up where the users have control of flagging the content like craigslist and you should have a strong TOS statement indicating that the forum owner, admins, mods, etc. aren't responsible, and also prohibiting your members from posting any kind of illegal content.

[ViReal.tv]

Thanks for the advice CBK. Very helpful

[marcorandazza]

I have had numerous ideas for sites that could make great money.

I even went ahead and had one developed... but once I had sought legal advice, I found that the liability that arises from users communicating is far too substantial to bear.

It never struck me to go asking anybody on Dnforum about how those operating sites of this nature overcome such liability.

So I guess I'm going ahead with it now... anybody have any advice as to how to absolve myself/my corporation of any liability when it comes to sites that involve user interaction such as forums?

CBK has it partially right.

If a lawyer told you that the liability is too substantial to bear, then either a) the lawyer doesn't know what he is talking about, or b) you told him that the site is going to be focused on clearly illegal content. I doubt that (b) is the case, so you may want to ask another lawyer. And, if (b) is the case, well... no way to help you there.

So lets presume that (a) is the case

Under 47 USC s. 230, you will not be deemed to be the publisher of offending content as long as you don't take a part in the publication. There are cases that demonstrate how you can lose that protection (the Roommates.com decision for example). This might give you a little instruction on that: http://randazza.wordpress.com/2008/0...-cda-immunity/

But ... there is another side to this coin -- Intellectual Property problems on your user-generated content site.

The CDA does not immunize you from liability for IP violations. So, lets say someone posts a copyrighted photo on your forum, or a link to a rapidshare file that is a stolen film. You're then on the hook UNLESS, (and this is the really simplified version)

1) You register a DMCA agent with the copyright office (cheap and easy)
2) You have a repeat infringer policy, and you ENFORCE it
3) You do not ignore copyright violations or ignore red flags pointing to them.

In short, running a user generated site is not all that scary or full of liability if you run it with any degree of care or ethics.