TheTrenchcoat Chronicles

MySpace lawsuit being appealed

Written by

Trench Reynolds

in

New Rounds Coming in Parents vs. MySpace.com:

It seems that the losers of the infamous $30M lawsuit against MySpace that was dismissed are more than losers. It seems that they are sore losers at that.

Let’s revisit the dismissal…

In dismissing the suit last month, a judge in Austin, Texas, cited a provision in the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA), which holds that, as an “interactive computer service,” News Corp. and its property MySpace were not liable for the postings to the site.

Of course, since this is America and litigation we’re talking about that won’t stop money hungry lawyers and opportunistic families now will it?

“We don’t believe the Communications Decency Act applies to a case like this,” said Adam Loewy of law firm Barry & Loewy, which is representing the minor.

He argued that the CDA applies primarily to defamation cases, such as when an owner of a Web site is sued over defamatory material published on the site. He said Judge Sparks erred in his interpretation of the CDA and that it does not limit MySpace’s liability for torts, or wrongful acts of members on its site.

Loewy is undeterred, and also plans to re-file a parallel suit against MySpace in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit located in San Francisco. That suit, also previously dismissed by Judge Sparks, accuses MySpace of fraud against the minor. But Loewy feels a court near Silicon Valley, which he says has handled more Internet-related cases, will be more prepared to rule in his client’s favor.

It’s got nothing to do with Silicon Valley but everything to do with the Ninth Circuit being more sympathetic to these anti-personal responsibility lawsuits.

I guess if at first you don’t succeed, sue, sue, again.

Comments

6 responses to “MySpace lawsuit being appealed”

  1. BelchSpeak Avatar
    BelchSpeak

    Sorry if this posted twice, my first comment didnt look like it took…

    Trech,
    You and I may have a difference of opinion on this. I think the CDA does indeed protect against defamation, but does not give immunity from operating a “public nusiance.”

    MySpace is operating a for-profit site that they know is riddled with kiddie predators. But instead of implementing simple age verification and identity checks, myspace would rather keep the site open to allcomers. This is wrong and in my opinion, negligent.

    MySpace is going after anyone that uploads copyrighted material and banning profiles. So this demonstrates that MySpace does take some threats seriously, and they have implemented technology to do so. Whether or not it works is not the goal. They demonstrate the “good faith efforts” taken to keep them from getting sued.

    I think they need to put in the same due diligence into protecting their underage users from sex predators. Failure to do so is negligence, and these lawsuits have a good chance of proving that.

    Of course the parents were slacking too. But Myspace must also do their best to prevent their product from being misused.

    If a toddler wanders onto a neighbor’s property and falls into an inground pool, and the pool’s owner did not have a fence around it, you know who’s fault it is? Not the parent of the toddler. The pool owner has to provide a good faith effort to keep his property safe. Or he’s running a “public nusiance.”

    Reply
  2. Trench Reynolds Avatar
    Trench Reynolds

    Playing devil’s advocate here, if MySpace starts monitoring activity on their site too closely people will complain that their privacy is being invaded and leave MySpace in droves.

    Besides, is there an age-verification technology out there that you can’t get around simply by lying?

    Reply
  3. BelchSpeak Avatar
    BelchSpeak

    They can do age verification without monitoring. And the only age verification technology that can’t be bypassed is a credit card purchase.

    Myspace should charge a minimal fee- even 1 dollar per month, and bill it to the credit card holder, along with the name of the user’s profile. Children cannot therefore be allowed online without having been granted permission by a credit card holder.

    Regarding sex offenders, their activity would also be tied to a real person’s name and address. Should they get out of line, there is no spoofing or avoiding the identity of the payee on the account. It would make it easier to track down offenders, and may be a deterrent to online abuse, bullying, etc.

    And you know how the states are trying to force sex offenders to cough up email addresses? This is stupid, and also patently unconstitutional. However, creating a new field in a person’s credit report that is checked if they are a sex offender, would prevent those card holders from registering with web services that cater to children. And this would also serve law enforcement well too for criminal investigations for sex crimes.

    Myspace doesnt need the subscription fees- they could call it a security fee or give the money away to charity. But it would satisfy prosecutors and states that myspace is doing something reasonable to prevent online predatory practices.

    Reply
  4. tiptoenot Avatar
    tiptoenot

    Belchspeak your opinion is one of a person that likes to place blame on others. Try personal responsibility. Where are the parents in all this. Why are there kids going on myspace and representing themselves as and calling themselves whores, etc. Placing up provocative photos, lying about their age, etc., etc.,

    I do not see why this is myspace’s fault at all. Ridiculous! These kids have wreaked enough havic and already made myspace police stuff that doesnt’ need policing. Bands have a hellof a time promoting because of the restrictions as do normal people and get their profiles deleted constantly and yet these little kids play the whore me game all day.

    Reply
  5. BelchSpeak Avatar
    BelchSpeak

    tiptoenot,
    If you visit my blog, you would know that I am not a person that likes to place blame on others. My argument is that I think the victims in this case may have a strong case. No company is allowed to sell a defective or dangerous product, especially to children.

    You simply cannot give MySpace a pass on this. They know their product is abused by pedophiles and rapists, and they have performed unacceptably at making the site safe for children.

    Im polishing up my crystal ball here. MySpace will lose one of these lawsuits. Afterwards they will enforce an age verification to protect themselves against future lawsuits.

    Reply
  6. Sue Avatar
    Sue

    The internet is not a toy designed for children. The US can pass a million laws and make companies responsible for keeping children safe, but those laws only apply to this country, not the rest of the world which is accessible via the internet. Plus laws do not stop criminal behavior, they punish it after the fact. There is only one solution – parents have to be responsible for the safety of their children, and they have to be held responsible if they provide their kids computers and online access and then do not oversee their activities. It is called parental negligence. We are not talking about the neighbors swimming pool, we are talking about a cesspool that the parents bring into their own home and give to their children.

    If a parent gave a child a gun and he subsequently shot himself, who would be responsible? If a parent put their kid on a freeway to play and that kid was hit by a car, who would be responsible?

    Reply

Leave a Reply to BelchSpeak Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More posts