- Sunday, 15 November 2009
- INQ Mobile
- RSS
This report, by its very length, defends itself against the risk of being read - Winston Churchill
Appeals court affirms dismissal of Craigslist lawsuit
ONLINE CLASSIFIED advertising and discussion forums website network Craigslist can't be held liable for material posted by its users, the Seventh US Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled.
Craiglist charges no fees for most classified adverts placed on its websites, except for job listings in some cities. Initially established in San Francisco in 1995, Craigslist has grown to serve all of the Americas, Asia, Europe, Africa and the Southwest Pacific. It attracts more than 30 million classified adverts and forum postings per month, including everything from garage sale items through cars, boats and jobs to a variety of services and online personal ads.
Craigslist was sued by a group of Chicago civil rights attorneys in February 2006 for allegedly violating US Fair Housing laws by publishing adverts that discriminated against potential home buyers or tenants on the basis of race, gender or religion.
Examples of housing adverts cited by the plaintiffs as illegally discriminatory were notices that included the conditions "NO MINORITIES," " Requirements: Clean Godly Christian Male" and "Only Muslims apply."
The appeals court upheld a November 2006 ruling by US District Judge Amy St. Eve of the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, who held that Craiglist is merely an intermediary, not a publisher, and that the US Communications Decency Act shields online forums that permit users to post unedited messages.
Kurt Opsahl, senior staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said that the ruling by the appellate court means that "the soapbox is not liable for what the speaker has said."
Craigslist CEO Jim Buckmaster said Friday in a statement, "We're pleased the Court agreed that online service providers like Craigslist should not be held liable as 'publishers' of content submitted by their users, and view this outcome as a win for the general public's ability to self-publish content (such as free classified ads) on the Internet."
The plaintiff Chicago Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law said in a statement, "While we are of course disappointed with the overall outcome of the case, we are gratified that the Court emphasized in the final paragraph of its decision that landlords and other housing providers who post discriminatory advertisements remain fully liable under the federal fair housing laws."
But they will have to go after those discriminatory landlords individually, now. ยต
L'Inq
Physorg.com
Share this:
ShareBusiness Intelligence Software
Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
Enterprise Accounting Software
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Enterprise Systems Management
It's CRIMINAL the way they led the bad guys use the law as a pretext for getting away with the bad stuff like this. "Only Muslims apply" -- how much more of a giveaway do you need? Craiglist is quite clearly sympathizing with the TERRISTS, and in cases of National Security like this, it has to be said that Abiding By The Law Is No Excuse!

This is exactly the kind of situation the Bush Administration is trying to prevent. And here we have Congress and the Courts just getting in their way!
I am divided on this topic, while I see both sides of the picture on this story. First of all craigslist can make policies regarding what people can and cannot post. but on the other hand they must clearly let their customers know the landlords policies and should on that level be a transparent between customers and landlords. So no craigslist should not be completely responsible its users posting their polocy...However they should consider looking into their policy regarding who they represent... they have the same right as the landlords, to deny service to anyone. But they would then run into the same problems the landlords have... denying service to the landlords based on their beliefs on who would be the best tennents.

Basically there is no easy solution... If you have a problem with the landlords sue THEM...

The first.... well is just discriminating fully on race, not looking for applicants that will line up with beliefs but purely off of looks...sad and racist...

They all have rights to deny service to anyone... as long as it is not soley based on ...religious belief, race,gender or social status... Interviews are the best way to do that ...post rules not religions as requirements... you can make rules that would cater towards a belief system without being discriminatory* 

rules always discriminate on those who don't want to follow them but as long as it is not saying stuff like ...must eat pork ... and the like :) the jews and muslims are sure missing alot of good food but hey do as you like* (as long as you are willing to accept the consequences) it is a free country after all.

The fact of life is we discriminate everyday..no way around it.. they are called judgment calls... if you are in a metro area and there are 5 fellows wearing loose clothing walking on the same side of the street as you and approaching you... would you switch sides?

so are you a racist... or do you not want to get mugged? that was a judgment call...smart or racist you decide...
Learn how to spell terrorist you door-knob. And did you miss the part of the article with the listing "Clean Godly Christian Male"? No, I think you just decided that that one was okay (you racist). This is a case of discrimination not terrorism.
The Sarcasm font in your browser must be borked. 

As a work-around, go to Tools -> Options -> User Options, and turn on "intelligence".

Sue Craigslist??? That just shows that those that filed the suit understand nothing of how Craigslist works or why the Internet was established in the first place. Sounds like an attempted money grab to me.