<img alt="" height="1" width="1">EFF and Sheppard Mullin Defend Wikipedia in Defamation Case
Kansas City infoZine, MO -56 minutes ago
San Francisco, CA - infoZine- The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the law firm of Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton Thursday filed a motion to ...
View the article
QUOTE(From the article...)
EFF and Sheppard Mullin Defend Wikipedia in Defamation Case
Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the law firm of Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton Thursday filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought against the operator of the popular online encyclopedia Wikipedia, arguing that federal law immunizes it against suits over statements made by its users.
Literary agent Barbara Bauer filed a complaint in New Jersey Superior Court in January against Wikipedia posters as well as the site itself, claiming in part that the Wikimedia Foundation was liable for statements identifying her as one the "dumbest of the twenty worst" agents and that she had "no documented sales at all." In court papers filed Thursday, Wikimedia argues that under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, operators of "interactive computer services" such as Wikipedia cannot be held liable for users' comments. In addition, Wikimedia argues that the statements are protected speech under the First Amendment and New Jersey law.
The ability to utilize the collaborative input of its users without fear of costly lawsuits is essential to Wikipedia's ongoing success, said Wikimedia Foundation General Counsel Mike Godwin.
Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the law firm of Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton Thursday filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought against the operator of the popular online encyclopedia Wikipedia, arguing that federal law immunizes it against suits over statements made by its users.
Literary agent Barbara Bauer filed a complaint in New Jersey Superior Court in January against Wikipedia posters as well as the site itself, claiming in part that the Wikimedia Foundation was liable for statements identifying her as one the "dumbest of the twenty worst" agents and that she had "no documented sales at all." In court papers filed Thursday, Wikimedia argues that under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, operators of "interactive computer services" such as Wikipedia cannot be held liable for users' comments. In addition, Wikimedia argues that the statements are protected speech under the First Amendment and New Jersey law.
The ability to utilize the collaborative input of its users without fear of costly lawsuits is essential to Wikipedia's ongoing success, said Wikimedia Foundation General Counsel Mike Godwin.
I am not qualified to render an informed opinion on the merits of the case, but it occurs to me that the mere fact of the case, and the need for Godwin to prepare a defense (an 18-page motion to dismiss), lends credence to the concern that contributions to WMF may be eaten up by such legal defenses if such suits become more common.
I like how the WMF's lawyers had to reference Doe v. SexSearch.com in order to find a comparable defense.
They also typed "American Online" as a reference. Typical Internet newbie mistake.
You're right, Moulton -- as more and more of these pile up (imagine if some of them started coming from US politicians!), the Foundation is going to be spending a lot of money of brief writing.
Greg
They also typed "American Online" as a reference. Typical Internet newbie mistake.
You're right, Moulton -- as more and more of these pile up (imagine if some of them started coming from US politicians!), the Foundation is going to be spending a lot of money of brief writing.
Greg
Curiously, someone deleted the AFD that got rid of [[Barbara Bauer]] today.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...2nd_nomination)
Why?
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...2nd_nomination)
Why?
QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 2nd May 2008, 12:16pm) 
I like how the WMF's lawyers had to reference Doe v. SexSearch.com in order to find a comparable defense.
Not reallly. That's a landmark online defamation case.
QUOTE(Rootology @ Fri 2nd May 2008, 12:37pm)
Curiously, someone deleted the AFD that got rid of [[Barbara Bauer]] today.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...2nd_nomination)
Why?
Courtesy delete. Winky winky. Three guesses who deleted it.
QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 2nd May 2008, 9:33am)
The ability to utilize the collaborative input of its users without fear of costly lawsuits is essential to Wikipedia's ongoing success, said Wikimedia Foundation General Counsel Mike Godwin.
That's Mike Godwin's value-added for the WMF, is lobbying and filing motions to dismiss. Besides, he's a former EFF guy, so his contacts will get them moving in their favor. Stat.
Betweein Godwin, his former haunt (EFF), and Donald Lessig, Jimbo scored himself some good lawyering on the cheep. Just like our Jimbo do.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.