Should Web sites be held legally responsible for user-generated content?

Yes
No
Resources for this issue
Reviews of this issue

This issue has been approved by whereIstand editors.

Do not use this page to take a stand on this issue.

This page shows the dialogue between users and editors regarding the merits of this issue. If you have comments about the issue's wording, relevance, etc., write them here. Only registered whereIstand members can edit an issue. Users must register in order to participate in all aspects of the whereIstand community.

6/18/2007 3:03:18 PM

This is somewhat similar to "Should bloggers be held responsible for comments posted on their blogs by others?" for which it's been tough to find pf evidence. However, the issue as here more broadly worded is relevant and important, and I'd be in favor of going ahead with it.

6/18/2007 2:33:54 PM

Very nice issue.

6/18/2007 2:08:37 PM

Information Week

A recent court ruling holds Web sites responsible for some user-generated content and could change the way sites control such content.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last week that the Roommates.com Web site can be held liable for violating the federal Fair Housing Act by allowing discriminatory postings. In Fair Housing Council v. Roommates.com, the court ruled that the Communications Decency Act doesn't protect the site from claims brought by two California fair housing groups.

6/12/2007 12:52:26 PM

It's a great issue, but I'm having a hard time finding evidence that's general enough. (It's mostly policies regarding specific, individual websites.)

6/12/2007 12:37:26 PM

issue prior to revisions:

Should the owners of Web sites be held legally responsible for user-generated content?
Yes
No
No position or position not known.

6/11/2007 12:28:37 AM

I'd support that revision also.

4/26/2007 11:14:07 AM

marina - that's fine with me

3/7/2007 2:25:31 PM

Can it be shortened to "Should Web sites be held legally responsible for user-generated contect?" implying their owners?

2/11/2007 10:42:57 PM

I do think this is very pertinent especially with the rise of the wiki site. 

1/15/2007 8:06:03 PM

I changed it to "owners of web sites", but now i think i've changed the meaning.

it's one thing if you have a blog and people write comments and you don't filter, moderate, or censor them. It's another thing if you run a community and don't do anything. It's really not practical to use the term "blogs" because with time blogs take on different aspects.

1/15/2007 8:02:36 PM

issue prior to revisions:

Should blogs be held responsible for activity in the comments sections and user profiles?
Yes
No
No position or position not known.

1/8/2007 4:00:41 PM

Yes, "user-generated content" works well.

1/6/2007 5:28:41 PM

absolutely, mccain is pushing to bring this on.

1/6/2007 2:16:19 PM

i'd like to change it to:

Should blogs be held responsible for user-generated content? 

the current language is clunky.  i think "user-generated content" accurately defines "comments and user profiles."

everyone?

12/20/2006 2:56:55 PM

I think it's a very relevant question!