Editors get no protection from CA Supreme Court

General discussion about Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects
Post Reply
Renée Bagslint
Posts: 306
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2017 1:43 pm

Editors get no protection from CA Supreme Court

Post by Renée Bagslint » Tue Jul 10, 2018 7:19 pm

The WMF blogs about what they call the "well-reasoned" decision of the California Supreme court in Hassell vs Bird, a case turning on the CDA S.230 protection. But in an intriguing comment, they note that
WMF legal wrote:Importantly, the Court’s decision does not leave Hassell without options. While she cannot circumvent CDA 230, she can still enforce her court order directly against Bird. Yelp, like the Wikimedia projects, allows users such as Bird to edit and delete most of their own contributions, including the disputed content in question.
To explain, Bird contributed a review on Yelp! that Hassell objected to. The implication is clear. The WMF would be quire content to see an individual user (like Bird) required to remove content provided that the WMF retains its immunity. So much for their commitment to the community.

Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 6:26 pm

Re: Editors get no protection from CA Supreme Court

Post by sashi » Tue Jul 10, 2018 11:32 pm

WeirdAl wrote:Think it's fun threatening waiters with a bad Yelp! review
(because I'm tacky)
The fact that they let Mr. Salsman's link to the case's reddit thread leak into the blog comments makes me think that the WMF probably wouldn't figure Yelp! to be a community.

Still, the comments in that Reddit thread about extortion are not without echo in Wikiland. (scroll down to the Racosch Method for an example, or, if you want, provide another one ^^)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest