Copyright Infringment Lawyer, Internet Defamation, and Internet Privacy

Section 230 Immunity Not Available For Website Commentor

Section 230 in the Communications Decency Act has typically been asserted as a defense by any website owner subject to a defamation claim based upon comments by a third party poster. However, a recent case from Kentucky highlights the fact that where the website owner actually participates in the comment creation, that website owner may not be able to avail itself of Section 230 immunity. In particular, a Federal Judge on Monday found that thedirty.com's owner was not able to use the Section 230 defense after having been sued for defamation by a former Cincinnati Bengals cheerleader based upon a post involving her sexual activities. The judge found that thedirty.com was not entitled to immunity because Section 230 does not apply when the owner added his own comments ratifying or adopting the posts posted by a third party contributor. In particular, the Federal Court opinion stated; "that is, a website owner who intentionally encourages illegal or actionable third party postings to which he adds his own comments ratifying or adopting the post becomes a "creator" or "developer" of that content and is not entitled to immunity".

Privacy and Notice Considerations for Mobile Tracking in Applications

The Digital Advertising Alliance recently released guidance to provide further direction to companies operating mobile applications. The guidance applies to companies that engage in behavioral targeting, with use of cross app tracking to serve advertisements, app base tracking of geo location data, collection of address book information from social networking accounts, and behavioral tracking on mobile websites. Fundamentally speaking, the guidance remains the same; give notice and choice on mobile devices. 

Unauthorized Use of the Name or Likeness of an Individual

There are various causes of action under what is commonly referred to as invasion of privacy. The first, false light invasion of privacy, occurs when information is published about a person that is false. Although similar to defamation, it is different because particular statement need not be defamatory but instead embellished, distort, or otherwise alter information in such a way that it amounts to a false light invasion of privacy.