Thanks for this, Eric: not sure why I had never heard of Cubby v. Compuserve before, but when I explain why I don't edit my list archives it will be a pretty powerful addition. -- Russ > On 10/27/2011 6:32 PM, Russ Hunt wrote: > > Setting the address to review makes sense, but I wonder about > > expunging the message. Most everybody who subscribes will have > > seen it, and if I were tempted to do that -- to spare readers of > > the archive? -- I'd worry that I'm setting the precedent that > > the list archive is, well, editable. > > In fact, Cubby v. Compuserve applies as it found just that. If the list > owner doesn't "edit" the list, they are immune from action. Just the > opposite was found in Stratton v. Prodigy in which Prodigy had a system > of editing messages, so they were subject to suit. > > Section 230 of the Comm Decency Act grants immunity to publishers of > email lists, I don't believe that this section has been tested. > > The conservative approach is to follow Cubby. > > Eric > > ############################ > > To unsubscribe from the LSTOWN-L list: > write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] > or click the following link: > http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=LSTOWN-L&A=1 Russ Hunt Department of English St. Thomas University http://www.stu.ca/~hunt/ ############################ To unsubscribe from the LSTOWN-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=LSTOWN-L&A=1