Seven Days actually gets a second mention today. The new issue has an article by Patrick Ripley that covers the recent iBrattleboro libel story that's been all the buzz lately. The coverage is a bit different from the others in that it also discusses the some of the VT blogosphere's reaction to the suit, which was decidedly different from that of the Reformer and the Argus. The newspaperrs were quite supportive of the claim against IBrattleboro. And of course, there's that "old media vs. new media" vibe that runs through the whole discussion at length in the pice. And it mentions a few familiar names, as well. Have a read.
Please see JD's earlier post on this topic for background.
In a nutshell, the owners of the iBrattleboro website (an interactive computer service) are defendants in a lawsuit.The Plaintiff alleges that the owners of iBrattleboro are responsible for damages caused by content posted on iBrattleboro by a third party.
The suit is going nowhere relative to iBrattleboro & its owners.
The owners of the iBrattleboro website are immune from liability in this situation.Federal law requires that the claims against iBrattleboro's owners must be dismissed.Why is this case meritless and why must it be dismissed without further proceedings? . . . below the fold . . .
Those of you that are blog addicts are well aware of the issue of a blog's liability as well as "ownership" of comments, whether it be if a blog's owner is legally responsible for the content in the comments section, or it be Bill O'Reilly bloviating about the worst comments in a section and trying to paint the whole blog as extreme as those comments. Apparently, the concept of trying to silence a blog by going after the owners is still a fresh one, as the owners of the community blog iBrattleboro (Brattleboro, VT) are now being sued for libel, over some comments that someone posted there. Go below the jump for more.
