Slashdot Mirror
Appeals Court Denies Safe Harbor for Roommates.com
Mariner writes "The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied Roommates.com Safe Harbor status under the Communications Decency Act in a lawsuit brought by the Fair Housing Councils of San Fernando Valley and San Diego. Roommates.com was accused of helping landlords discriminate against certain kinds of tenants due to a couple of questions on the Roommates.com registration form: gender and sexual orientation. 'Though it refused to rule on whether Roommates.com actually violated the Fair Housing Act, the Court did find that it lost Section 230 immunity because it required users to enter that information in order to proceed. As Judge Alex Kozinski put it in his opinion, "if it is responsible, in whole or in part, for creating or developing the information, it becomes a content provider and is not entitled to CDA immunity."'"
You don't have to get all pissy about the "no fags or bitches" part of my flier.
We couldn't run an ad that said no Portuguese, but ummm...no Portuguese.
If you were unknowingly matched up with a gay man, and you're a devout Evangelical Christian
I smell sitcom!
spend all their time in the gym
There is a reason we do this, and it isn't fitness.
As an even straighter man, I'd be even more comfortable living with 2 or 3 lesbians!
(I think that might be the reason they started requiring gender in ads for roommates...)
sic transit gloria mundi
D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
"WANTED: Female roomate. NO FATTIES."
Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
Damn, I could have sworn I scraped it off my shoe.