RSS
Twitter
Court Says Wikimedia Isn't Liable For Statements On Wikipedia
from the section-230-isn't-user-editable dept
Back in May, when literary agent Barbara Bauer sued the Wikimedia Foundation, claiming that it was liable for various critical comments on the site (such as the ones calling her the "dumbest of the twenty worst" agents, who has "no documented sales at all"), we suggested she probably would have saved a lot of time, effort and heartbreak using Wikipedia to look up Section 230 of the CDA that says that service providers are not liable for the content of their users. Instead, she went forward with the lawsuit and had the court teach her the lesson that Wikipedia could have: the court tossed out the case, noting that the Wikimedia Foundation is not liable under section 230. The end result for Barbara Bauer? She doesn't get to sue Wikipedia, and her actions brought a lot more attention to the fact that she has a lot of critics. I have no idea how "smart" she is as a literary agent, but this didn't seem very "smart" concerning how to respond to criticism of her reputation.
Reader Comments
(Flattened / Threaded)
I have no idea how "smart" she is as a literary agent
Funny how quickly people like this rail against *certain* free speech, yet - if it was something that had $$$ potential for her, she'd be whining about free speech.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Wiki
Umm -- Hello? The definition of wiki? Did she look that up? Guess not.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
why not just sign up on wikipedia and rectify the untrue and opinions? ... guess people with money would rather use lawyers to make fools of themselves sometimes.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
intelligence
I understand her being upset about the comments, I mean I don't think anyone would appreciate being referred to as dumb, or stupid; however as has been said before, if she did a little research of her own, or read the bottom of any wikipedia page, "wikipedia is not liable for content contained on this site ... etc, etc" ... apparently not everyone knows that Wikipedia is not a credible litarary resource as it is user editable. Oh well, more money than brains apparently ... must be nice.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: intelligence
Seems to me that her actions in this case only served to confirm the statements made about her intelligence.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment