There are two things here. One, the posts are the property of the original poster. They hold the copyright to such posts and are liable for them, not the forum operators. This is often spelled out somewhere in the TOS and that the operators cannot be held responsible.
The suit (as I read it) is pretty lame.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Per the Reuters Article
Other users also took personal shots at Galton, and he filed suit in April of this year against them. At the same time, he sought their personal information via a subpoena from Yahoo. The company, the suit said, responded with incomplete or inaccurate information.
|
For one thing ... this is no different than a flame war on any other board that I have seen. Often the guy taking the brunt of the stick starts to cry foul and cries (wah, wah, type of crying) that he wants the posts deleted.
Next the guy starts to blame the forum operator for not "moderating" like a professional, and what he would have done. I have heard this all before.
The fact that Yahoo DID provide this guy with information (it may be required) is all that Yahoo could do. It does not matter if it is incomplete or inaccurate --- that is what these people signed up as or allowed Yahoo to know.
Should Yahoo provide more info, like IP addresses? Probably, but I have not seen the posts -- nor do I know the other side of the story. Was Yahoo asked for IPs? dunno ... no mention in that brief blurb.
Quote:
|
The suit proposes as a class any California resident who has been targeted by abusive messages on a Yahoo board, who tried to get such messages stopped or learn the identity of the message poster, and who had such requests denied within the last four years. It seeks restitution, a permanent injunction and other forms of relief.
|
Looking particularly for "denials" here. This guy is fishing in the wind in my opinion.
From my observances of these flame attacks, it is usually the guy who is crying foul that stirs the pot to boiling in the first place. He always comes in under the guise of defense of his (or someone else's) good name and does nothing more than start something short of a riot. Normally, these people do it intentionally because they have nothing better to do with their time or a little bit anal retentive to begin with.
Most of the time it is some obscure fragment or sentence out of hundreds that nobody would even notice, nor would they even care. Sometimes the person is not even mentioned by name, but here comes Peter Crier to take offense to it -- and let's the cat out of the bag that it was him who the poster was referring to.
Had they left it alone in the first place -- then it would have been buried in less than a couple of hours (if I know message boards at Yahoo, it would have been minutes).
But again ... without seeing the posts in question or the history, I cannot pass any judgement on this one except to say that I do not think he has a leg to stand on.