Libel in cyberspace: can anything you post be used against you? http://www.nando.net/newsroom/ntn/info/050497/info5_13497.html Copyright 1997 Nando.net Copyright 1997 The Associated Press (May 4, 1997 1:03 p.m. EDT) -- When the Founding Fathers wrote the First Amendment protecting freedom of the press, they never imagined millions of Americans would someday have their own version of one sitting in their back rooms. But with the advent of the World Wide Web, that's exactly what has happened. And from this revolution has emerged a new legal quandary: Just what standards are private individuals to be held to when it comes to what they "publish" on the millions of Web pages and other online forums that serve as the world's soapbox? To a great extent, the answer thus far is this: No one knows. With the Web revolution less than 3 years old, a body of case law hasn't yet been built up. But lawyers who study online issues do have some observations -- and advice. First off, they note, the line between slander, once the realm of individuals, and libel, the bane of publishers, has been blurred. It used to be that spreading malicious gossip about someone down at the barbershop could lead to charges of slander. But slander, by definition spoken, was hard to prove and generally didn't reach enough people to do any major harm. Post that same information where it can be read by millions online, however, and you've suddenly entered the realm of libel -- governed by stricter laws originally written to cover print publications. "Let's face it," says Mark Rasch, director of information security law and policy at the Center for Information Protection at Science [91 lines left ... full text available at <url:http://www.reference.com/cgi-bin/pn/go?choice=message&table=05_1997&mid=871949&hilit=COPYRIGHT+LEGAL> ] -------------------------------- Article-ID: 05_1997&888426 Score: 80 Subject: Re: Griffis Is A Lawyer Now (was Indian Artifacts etc.)