Ouch.

This is why an overriding policy of "let's be nice to each other" is so crucial.

I think the key word there is settled. Can't find it at the moment but a similar suit was brought somewhere here in the US not too long ago and in that case the website was found not responsible for user comments.

Rightly so IMO, as I mentioned in another thread holding a site owner responsible for the content posted by users would essentially put an end to forums like this one. The way I look at it a forum is no different that a community bulletin board at the supermarket which are common in my neck of the woods. You wouldn't hold the supermarket responsible for something posted there and I don't see why a web forum should be any different.

There is also this quote in the article:

It said: "Contrary to statements which have appeared in some sections of the press, Gina Ford never, ever, threatened to take legal action against any individual member of Mumsnet.

I ask why not? It was the individual members posting the comments, at the very least they should have been named in the same lawsuit. Well I don't have to really ask, the answer is simple. The website has much deeper pockets.

Libel/Slander laws are different in the UK/Europe then they are in the states. A suit like this probably would get thrown out in the USA.

Yes, it would get thrown out, most likely, but if memory serves, there were some really evil posts on that board, and the site owner knew, and didn't do anything about it.

I don't fault site owners which aren't aware of what has been posted, but there's nothing ethical about leaving wicked stuff on, especially when it violates your site's TOS.

Most board masters owe nothing to the posters. They are free. No reason why any of them should "take a stand" in the name of free speech.

For those who want to take a stand, however, make sure it's for something important, not frivolous stuff like insults. I don't think the mothers board kept important comments online.

1) Don't run a forum unless you are well versed in your country's libel law; 2) remove TOS-violating content quickly; and, 3) don't be a smart-a**.

p/g

I think this is totally rediculous. It has already gotten far more mention than it deserves. Waaa waaa someone flamed me on the Internet boo hoo . . . .

in the name of free speech

This argument has **always** bothered me. Free speech applies to public speech and expression of ideas without government suppression. When you're in my house, you talk to everyone kindly and mind your manners or out you go on your ear. Everywhere I've ever heard the "free speech, I know my rights" argument it has been in a privately owned venue. People need to get over themselves, we have so many greater problems to address.