[6WashJLTech&Arts125] Inducement or Solicitation? Competing Interpretations of the “Underlying Illegality” Test in the Wake of Roommates.Com

digital.law/Manakin Repository

[6WashJLTech&Arts125] Inducement or Solicitation? Competing Interpretations of the “Underlying Illegality” Test in the Wake of Roommates.Com

Show full item record

Title: [6WashJLTech&Arts125] Inducement or Solicitation? Competing Interpretations of the “Underlying Illegality” Test in the Wake of Roommates.Com
Author: Doty, Jeffrey R; Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts
Abstract: In Fair Housing Council of San Fernando Valley v. Room-mates.com, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that a Web site operator loses the immunity granted by section 230 of the Communications Decency Act by materially contributing to the alleged illegality of its third-party content. Subsequent case law seems to reflect two different standards for determining when this “underlying illegality” test is satisfied. Most courts have adopted a narrow reading of Roommates.com, denying immunity only when a Web site has explicitly requested illegal content. In NPS LLC v. StubHub, Inc., however, a Massachusetts district court appears to adopt a broader inducement-based standard that would impose liability upon a much wider range of conduct. This Article examines the recent case law in order to identify the contours of these differing theories for negating section 230 immunity.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/1773.1/478
Date: 2010-10

Files in this item

Files Size Format View
6wjlta125Doty.pdf 165.4Kb PDF View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show full item record

Search digital.law


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account