The CDA Has Killed Traditional Concepts of Defamation Law

In The ‘Course Conversation’ of Tucker Max: Are Traditional Concepts of Defamation Law Dead? we discussed a case in which the United District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania held that the Communications that Section 509 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) bars a defamation claim based upon anonymous postings to a message board not authored by the defendant. Obviously, application of the CDA in that context represents a substantial (and potentially troubling) departure from the common law of defamation.

Eric Goldman’s Technology & Marketing Law Blog points us to an article which demonstrates that the court’s interpretation of the CDA in the Tucker Max case is far from unusual. Of the 55 reported cases in which the CDA was raised in defense of tort claims, the plaintiff prevailed only 7 times. With more and more people communicating over the Internet, traditional concepts of defamation law may indeed be dead.

For more information, see Wikipedia and 230 and a Great 230 Case Law Resource on Eric Goldman’s Technology & Marketing Law Blog.

Update (8/28/2006):  InternetCases.com has an excellent post about a recent CDA case involving the "infamous" owners of Ripoffreport.com.  The reported activities of the owners of Ripoffreport.com may be reason enough to be troubled by the overbreadth of the CDA.

Technorati Tags:  defamation, cda