Cyber Law Communications Decency Ac

Question: The most famous case on the topic of whether the Internet Service Provider (ISP) like AOL can be held liable for defamation by one of its subscribers came when Matt Drudge, in his famousOn-line Drudge Reportcharged that Sidney Blumenthal, an assistant to President Clinton, "has a spousal abuse past that has been effectively covered up." Immediately, Drudge found that the report was not true and printed a retraction and a public apology. However, Blumenthal and his wife, Jacqueline Blumenthal, who worked for the Clinton White House sued Drudge and AOL, his Internet Service Provider. This trial was held in the Federal District Court for Washington, D.C. in 1998, and the court held. What do you think the court should do about holding AOL liable? Find the outcome and post it. Also state your opinionbased on the correct legal conclusions of whether or not the court was correct. Answer: 1. In the said case, which is Blumenthal v. Drudge an internet, publication falsely accused Sidney Blumenthal of physically abusing his wife. Thus, Sidney Blumenthal brought a defamation suit against Matt Drudge who was the author of the article. Sidney Blumenthal also sued America Online, Inc (herein after referred as AOL) stating that AOLS contractual relationship with Matt Drudge gave them editing rights over the work, which would be published by Matt Drudge, thus this made Matt Drudge an Agent of AOL (Dickinson, Gregory M). Thus, under section 230 of the Communications Decency Actit is clearly stated that it will not be allowed for any provider of any computer and online service to be treated as a publisher or the speaker of the information provided by another information content provider. Thus, the Federal Court in United States of America applied the said section to the present case, stated that the allegations of Sidney Blumenthal against AOL are baseless, and should be denied. Thus, the Federal Court of United States of America clearly stated that it was constrained by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Actto rule in favour of America Online, Inc (Burke, Michael). Therefore, in mu opinion, the decision of the Federal Court in United States of America was correct and the decisions was backed with the application of the section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. The said section was formed to provide a broad protection to all internet service providers like the America Online, Inc and promotes freedom of speech to develop in the online sector. However, in the said case, Matt Drudge was considered liable for defamation and was sentenced accordingly. Reference List Burke, Michael. "Cracks in the Armor: The Future of the Communications Decency Act and Potential Challenges to the Protections of Section 230 to Gossip Web Sites."BUJ Sci. Tech. L.17 (2011): 232. Dickinson, Gregory M. "Interpretive Framework for Narrower Immunity under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, An."Harv. JL Pub. Pol'y33 (2010): 863.