In a message dated 97-07-30 18:20:54 EDT, you write:
<< 1) I understand that, as in the Prodigy case, editing contributions to
the board for content may cause us to be liable for the contributions
that *are* posted. I also understand that if we excericise no editorial
control over the bulliten board (as with the Compuserve case) we will
not be held liable.>>
This oversimplifies the issue just a bit. In the Prodigy case, the act of
asserting editorial control was only part of the equation. The other part,
which was a major factor, is that Prodigy actively promoted and advertised
such control to the general public. CompuServe did just the opposite.
>> However I have a question as to whether "editorial
control" has been defined specifically as removing or editing a users
It seems to me that such actions are the very essence of editorial control.
>> That is, I wonder if taking action to block a user from the
board for a) clearly breaking a law (i.e. invasion of privacy or
defamation) or b) breaking a more specific "user agreement" (i.e.
excessive profanity) would legally constitute "editorial control" over
the bulliten board.>>
This is a closer question, but I would not consider excluding a user to be
"editorial control" as it does not impact on the material that is posted,
only prevents further posting by an individual. I believe "editorial
control" only encompasses the ability to delete, alter or edit posted