Trevor
0
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2009
- Messages
- 4,386
- Points
- 113
PL references EFF 47 USC § 230 as a description of their 445nm forum.
Here's a good read concerning it: Cybertelecom :: Good Samaritan 47 USC § 230
TL; DR:
It has been interpreted in court (there is a precedent) as immunity for content providers (like bloggers, or forums like LPF) from being held responsible for content posted by other content providers (members here). In short, [a certain company whose projectors get opened for high-power 445nm laser diodes] can't sue LPF itself for content concerning them.
I'm not sure if they'd be willing to target individual members, and I am unsure of precedents in that area.
As for LPF, it definitely has serious protection, if not immunity.
-Trevor
Here's a good read concerning it: Cybertelecom :: Good Samaritan 47 USC § 230
TL; DR:
EFF 47 USC § 230 said:
It has been interpreted in court (there is a precedent) as immunity for content providers (like bloggers, or forums like LPF) from being held responsible for content posted by other content providers (members here). In short, [a certain company whose projectors get opened for high-power 445nm laser diodes] can't sue LPF itself for content concerning them.
I'm not sure if they'd be willing to target individual members, and I am unsure of precedents in that area.
As for LPF, it definitely has serious protection, if not immunity.
-Trevor
