>> This is an obvous case of a person confusing his subject (!) matter with the
country in which he lives.  Should he, and his department colleagues, recognise
that it's the "American" language with which we concern ourselves, this little
difference of opinion would burn off like the SF fog (that has certainly
obscured his perceptions of things, people, and events).  A<>E<>R <<<

>From www.wsws.org

WSWS : News & Analysis : The Internet
Internet free speech under attack in San Francisco libel suit
By Mike Ingram
18 April 2000
Back to screen version

A libel trial taking place in San Francisco could have major implications for
freedom of speech on the Internet, according to the American Civil Liberties
Union (ACLU).

The case involves an English professor, Daniel Curzon Brown, who teaches at the
City College in San Francisco. Brown claims that a web site set up by a former
student in 1997 has carried libellous comments about him.

The site, teacherreview.com, was set up by Ryan Lathouwers as an online
resource for students trying to decide what classes and teachers to select. The
site allows students to post reviews of their teachers together with lecturers'
comments. Since its launch in September 1997, more than 5,000 individual
reviews of 600 City College instructors have been posted and the site has been
visited more than 100,000 times.

In October 1999 Brown filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of himself and all
other City College employees "who have been or will be defamed by the content
of Teacher Review". His suit seeks monetary damages and an injunction
prohibiting the posting of "defamatory" reviews on the web site and prohibiting
either City College or the Associated Students from linking to the site.

In fact, the rest of the 1,700 teaching staff at the college have ignored the
comments posted or avoided the site itself. Brown has singled out particularly
vicious comments relating to his sexuality and mental state. In one posting he
is described as "homomanic, racist and mentally ill". The majority of comments,
however, are by students expressing their opinion of his teaching. They include
comments such as "pompous" and "the worst teacher I have ever had the
opportunity of knowing."

The site includes a "bottom 10" of the teachers who have received more than 25
reviews and Brown ranks fifth on that list.

The ACLU has come to the defence of Lathouwers in the interests of free speech
as protected under the First Amendment to the US Constitution. Other defendants
in the case—the San Francisco Community College District, which is the
governing body of City College, and the Associated Students of City
College—agree that the First Amendment covers the comments.

Ann Brick of the ACLU California staff said, "The Teacher Review website is a
perfect example of how the Internet functions as a unique and valuable
information source. If permitted to proceed, this case would sound the death
knell for any website or bulletin board allowing members of the pubic to
exchange opinions."

Lawyers acting for Lathouwers said, "Imagine a liberal arts professor unable to
tolerate his students expressing their own opinions, and unwilling to allow
students to draw their own conclusions from what others have to say.
Fortunately, the First Amendment prevents people like Professor Curzon Brown
from using lawsuits to silence their critics."

At present US Internet Service Providers (ISP) are protected under the 1996
Communications Decency Act, which essentially allows ISPs immunity from libel
laws. In a number of previous cases, the US courts have upheld the position
that an ISP is not liable for the content carried on their service. In a legal
brief presented by the ACLU in October 1999 they argue that the purpose of the
1996 legislation was twofold. Firstly its purpose was "to maintain the robust
nature of Internet communication and, accordingly, keep government interference
in the medium to a minimum". The argument is cited from a failed case against
America Online in 1997. The law was also "'to encourage service providers to
self-regulate the dissemination of offensive material over their services
without fear of incurring liability or reserving the power to do so or for
having exercised that power imperfectly," the lawyers argue.

The ACLU argue that in adopting the 1996 legislation, Congress "made a policy
choice ... not to deter harmful online speech through the separate route of
imposing tort liability on companies that serve as intermediaries for other
parties' potentially injurious messages".

Previous precedents are no absolute guarantee, however, against the erosion of
free speech on the Internet. With the number of cases against ISPs increasing,
it is entirely possible that one of these will set new precedents within the
US. Even if this is not the case, such is the international character of the
Internet that it is by no means clear where a US-based provider would stand if
it were subject to legal action by an overseas court.

Copyright 1998-2000
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved

A<>E<>R
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Integrity has no need of rules. -Albert Camus (1913-1960)
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking
new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said
it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your
own reason and your common sense." --Buddha
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that
prevents us from living freely and nobly. -Bertrand Russell
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Everyone has the right...to seek, receive and impart
information and ideas through any media and regardless
of frontiers." Universal Declaration of Human Rights
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will
teach you to keep your mouth shut." Ernest Hemingway
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are sordid
matters
and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
<A HREF="http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to