Calif. Ruling Rejects Libel for Online Republishers

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — In a decision that could have profound repercussions for web publishers, bloggers and anyone who posts to online message boards, the California Supreme Court said those who republish defamatory statements online couldn’t be held liable.

The unanimous ruling deals with the 1996 Communications Decency Act. Earlier court rulings had construed Section 230 of the statute to provide a shield for companies such as AOL and eBay from liability for defamatory remarks made by others, provided that the companies make a good faith effort to restrict access to material that could be considered “obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing or otherwise objectionable."

In drafting the law, Congress “has comprehensively immunized republication by individual Internet users, intending to protect online freedom of expression and to encourage self-regulation,” Associate Justice Carol Corrigan said.

The case arises out of allegedly libelous statements made online by Ilena Rosenthal, a women’s health advocate, who published a letter by co-defendant Tim Bolen attacking Pennsylvania psychiatrist Stephen Barrett and Canadian doctor Terry Polevoy for their unfavorable views of alternative medicine.

Alameda County Superior Court Judge James Richman tossed the libel suit in 2001, but a San Francisco appellate court reinstated the case saying that an email from Barrett threatening to sue Rosenthal put her on notice that she could be held liable for publishing Bolen’s letter.

That ruling prompted a range of online companies, including Earthlink and Amazon.com, as well as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, to file amicus briefs on behalf of Rosenthal and Bolen, arguing that imposing liability after a potential plaintiff sends email notice threatening to sue could chill free speech.

While the court said, "recognizing broad immunity for defamatory republications on the Internet has some troubling consequences,” the justices concluded that lawmakers would be the ultimate arbiters of the issue.

“Unless Congress revises the law, anyone who claims to be defamed by an Internet posting may seek damages only from the original source of the statement,” Corrigan said.

EFF attorney Lee Tien praised the decision, saying that “it’s so patently obvious that users are protected by the plain language and policy of [Section] 230.”

Attorney J.D. Obenberger told XBIZ he disagreed with the ruling.

"I think it's a nutty decision because it creates a plenary immunity for wilful defamation from a statute meant to restrict, rather than to enhance speech," he said. "It leaves the victims of intentional, malicious lies without remedy or recourse for the republication of hurtful lies about them by persons who know the statements to be harmful lies."

According to Obenberger, the decision builds in the direction of irresponsibility for webmasters.

"The California Supreme court has taken an anti-free speech statute and found in it a cart blanche to knowingly publish defamatory material, so long as the publisher is not the author."

In the decision, Corrigan noted that the defamation jurisprudence developed over the lengthy history of offline publishing isn’t always a source from which judges can rely upon without accounting for changes in technology.

In offline defamation cases, the law distinguishes between “publishers,” such as newspapers, and “distributors,” such as newsstands. Distributors can only be held liable if they are given notice of a defamatory statement contained in the publications they sell.

Corrigan said transferring such distinctions to the online world could chill free speech because of the ease with which anyone could use the so-called “heckler’s veto,” thereby putting online publisher on notice and potentially opening them to liability.

Possibly leaving open a remedy for plaintiffs who are victims of particularly egregious conduct, Justice Carlos Moreno wrote in his concurring opinion that the law and the ruling should not be read to immunize Internet users who republish libelous speech if they have conspired with the originator of the statement.

Copyright © 2025 Adnet Media. All Rights Reserved. XBIZ is a trademark of Adnet Media.
Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission is prohibited.

More News

Update: Pornhub Will Not Block Ohio, Despite AV Law

Pornhub parent company Aylo will not block access to its websites in Ohio, despite new state age verification rules that came into effect Sept. 30.

Judge Dismisses Some Claims in 'Children of Pornhub' Trafficking Suit

A United States district judge on Friday dismissed some but not all claims against Aylo in a long-running case involving CSAM allegations featured in the influential 2020 New York Times article “The Children of Pornhub.”

Pornhub Shuts Down Access in Ohio Over Age Verification

Aylo began geoblocking Pornhub across the state of Ohio on Tuesday, as the state’s age verification law goes into effect.

Arcom to Expand AV Enforcement to Smaller Adult Sites

The president of French media regulator Arcom revealed on Thursday that the agency plans to escalate its enforcement of age verification rules to include smaller adult sites, starting in late 2025 or early 2026.

Pornhub to Shut Down Access in Arizona Over Age Verification

Aylo will geoblock Pornhub across Arizona starting Sept. 26, when the state’s age verification law, HB 2112, goes into effect.

French Telecoms Mogul Ignites AV Firestorm With Free VPN, Sarcastic Tweet

French billionaire Xavier Niel, founder of telecommunications giant Iliad, sparked a heated debate this week when he appeared to admit that the company's Free Mobile wireless carrier integrated no-cost VPN into its service specifically to circumvent age verification restrictions on adult content.

UPDATED: Michigan Legislators Propose Online Porn Ban

Michigan lawmakers have introduced a bill that would make it illegal to distribute pornography via the internet in the state.

EU Advocate General: France Can Require Foreign Sites to Implement AV

An advocate general of the European Union’s Court of Justice on Thursday advised the court to rule that France may require pornographic websites based in other EU states to implement age verification in accordance with French law.

Florida AG Sues Aylo, Segpay Over State AV Law

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier filed lawsuits against Aylo and Segpay on Monday with the 12th Judicial Circuit Court of Florida for noncompliance with HB3, the state's age verification law.

Colombian Court Sides with Performer Esperanza Goméz Over IG Suspensions

Colombia’s Constitutional Court last week ruled in favor of adult performer Esperanza Gómez in her legal battle against Meta over repeated suspensions of her Instagram account.

Show More