re·fined

Court Rules RipOff Report Not Required to Remove Defamation

I’ve personally gotten to the point of accepting that RipOff Report will never be removed from Google’s index–such peace comes from accepting what you can’t control.

However, my teeth are still grinding over a recent ruling that basically says RipOff Report is not required to remove defamatory content from its web site. Techdirt reports…

Last week, in an appeal on that original case, the appeals court basically ruled the same way: Ripoff Report has no requirement to remove the content judged to be defamatory, because it is not a party to the lawsuit, and thanks to Section 230 it cannot be a party to that lawsuit.

Not the news that many suffering at the hands of defamation on RoR wanted to hear. 🙁

Still, there are a couple small rays of light.

First, while not removing the defamatory content, RipOff Repot did update the page indicating that the content had been ruled defamatory.

Second, the courts still disagree over whether RoR does or does not have to remove defamatory content–with a Florida state court granting a restraining order forcing RoR to remove a different defamatory post. That’s a small victory and is only a temporary restraining order.

Mike Masnick is certainly more learned in defamation laws than me, but I tend not to agree that the only remedy for online defamation should be monetary damages and not the removal of said defamation. If it’s not removed, it continues to damage the reputation of the person attacked. I’m sure Masnick would agree that if someone stood in Times Square every day and called you a murderer and a cheat, you’d want the guy removed, not fined so he can continue each day. 😉