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