Judges Rule Raped Woman Can Sue 'Enabling' Web Site (vice.com)

Web sites that matched models to photographers also led dozens of women to a pair of rapists in 2011, according to Vice. "Civil court documents show that the owners of Model Mayhem knew about the first wave of rapes but failed to issue a warning to users," Vice reported last summer. Facebook, Craigslist, and Tumblr filed briefs in support of the "Model Mayhem" site, arguing that allowing women to sue them could create a new "failure to warn" liability for other web sites. But now AmiMoJo writes:In a decision that one day could have reverberations across the internet, a three-judge panel in California decided she can sue the Model Mayhem site that the pair used to lure their victims. "Congress has not provided an all purpose get-out-of-jail-free card for businesses that publish user content on the Internet," Judge Richard Clifton wrote in the panel's decision. The CDA traditionally exempts web sites from liability for anything their users post. Do Slashdot readers think there should ever be any exceptions?

Comments

Re: Did they know who the culprits were?

[Anonymous Coward]

I love this place. </s>

Does anyone remember the days when the comment threads for SlashDot used to actually contain highly relevant and thoughtful discussion?

We've always had idiot trolls like Doctor Dumbass, here, but they tended to be a tiny minority.

I used to check SlashDot first thing every day. Now, I check once a week, and often find "new" news stories that have been out in the Gawker sites for a week.

I almost never read the comments anymore. This comment is a pretty classic example of some of the more "cerebral" comments to be found. (maybe a "breakfast cerebral", like Captain Crud?)

Gone are the days when I could actually learn about new technologies from actual scientists and engineers with far greater knowledge than I.

Nowadays, I need to quaff half a pint of shoe polish, just to get in a frame of mind where I can actually understand this drivel.