Forum owner's responsibilities--slander?

[sunfall]

What is the name of your state? California

My sister runs a little website for work-at-home parents and people seeking to work from home. Among her goals is to help people trying to avoid scams. One poster posted a message about a particular school, including some questionable practices the school engages in to promote themselves and so forth.

The school posted a message asking her to remove this post, because "it is all lies". Sister declined, inviting her instead to post her own statement about the school--in short, she is willing to present both sides of the argument. The school owner refuses, and is now threatening "legal action". My question: Under any circumstances, does this school owner have a case? Is sister's response appropriate? If she's willing to present both sides of the argument, is this a problem?

Pragmatically, how much of a mess can this school owner make trying to fight this? Sis is seven months pregnant, just moved, has two jobs, one child and husband has a new job--in short, if the "mess potential" is high, she may just find it more expedient to say "Fine. I will forbid all mention of your school--positive or negative--from my boards". She really doesn't want to cave into this.

Your comments are appreciated.

 

[seniorjudge]

"...Pragmatically, how much of a mess can this school owner make trying to fight this? ..."

Pragmatically, there is a 50-50 chance.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

The school has no legal standing to sue although they have every right as anyone does, to sue anyone.

I suggest you do a search on this site using the terms "distributor" and "Publisher".

 

[sunfall]

Thanks both of you. We have decided to take the pragmatic road. She really doesn't have time right now to deal with the stress. So basically, while anyone can talk about any other school, they cannot discuss that one, positive or negative. She is also filtering them on Google AdSense.

Our basic take was, if she will not accept the opportunity to refute the statements but insists they get pulled, we will not allow any reference to her company. Further, her request to pull the statement stays up, along with sis's offer of equal time, and her threat of legal action. People can draw their own conclusions--without one word against her school ever appearing on sis' website. Basically, she's just shot herself in the foot as far as the viewers of the site are concerned. But, so far as I can tell, that's legal.

 

[meganproser]

>>Further, her request to pull the statement stays up, along with sis's offer of equal time, and her threat of legal action.

Um, it is possible to libel someone by innuendo. What your sister has left in place may be more damaging to the school than the original statements made by the unhappy parent.

>>People can draw their own conclusions--without one word against her school ever appearing on sis' website.

People mistakenly believe they can safely communicate something negative about a person or organization if they just phrase it cleverly enough. But as you acknowledged, the same negative impression is going to be communicated after editing, as was before editing.

It’s not the actual words used that get you in trouble, it’s the overall impression a reasonable reader gets from the publication. The main effect of your sister's editing is that now your SHE is the one responsible for the impression that is made on readers.

I do think it’s a bit unreasonable to expect the school to address complaints or concerns on an Internet forum.

Your sister should tell her posters not to put her in the middle of a business dispute.

 

[sunfall]

I agree that it is possible to slander someone by innuendo, and also with the concept that she could be blamed for it--if she has made any statements that could be construed as against the site in any way. All she has said is that they have requested she remove this information, that she is doing so under protest. She has further stated that this is a rule--from now on, no mentions of this school--positive, negative, or indifferent. The only negative impression left is that she asked us to remove something, refused to refute it instead, and threatened to sue us if we didn't comply. In short, only her own words are defamatory toward her. We VERY carefully made sure of that.

One purpose of the site is to help people sort out scams from legitimate opportunities for education and at-home careers. It is necessary to have people post their opinions, and we welcome contradictory opinions. One company was labeled a scam by three separate people. The owner came and commented, refuting the allegations. We left both to stand, allowed others to comment. We are not--by a long shot--the only ones to do this on our website.

On that note, I should say I am less worried than I might be, because we have also heard from other website owners who have dealt with her. One has offered documentation that the allegations (and more) were truthful, all have said that she does this--threatens to sue, but never does. If she finds this approach offensive, well, she can always try telling us its still not acceptable, and threatening again. I don't know what my sister will decide to do--I help a lot but it's ultimately her call--but I think for now, we are both content. She is aware of the edits, and has made no complaint as yet.

 

[meganproser]

>> In short, only her own words are defamatory toward her. We VERY carefully made sure of that.

HER words were made in reference to something else, which has now been removed. You have deleted the information that would have qualified her remarks. Her words or not, someone else edited it and it's leaving an impression all it's own now.

>>We are not--by a long shot--the only ones to do this on our website.

I know, .

>>She is aware of the edits, and has made no complaint as yet.

Sounds good!

 

[djohnson]

I personally think you are fine keeping it up (depending on what it says). Everyone is allowed to have his/her opinion and speak it. If it's the truth or that posters opinion then I don't see how she could be liable. Put on the site that opinions expressed is not necessarily those of the site but of that individual poster. If not then all the sites like ebaysucks and even this site as much as people talk about certain creditors, would have problems.