by Mike Masnick
Mon, Dec 7th 2009 4:11pm
I've been a fan of actor Ron Livingston for a while, so it's disappointing to see him push forward with an obviously dead-in-the-water lawsuit against Wikipedia. Livingston is upset that someone keeps changing his Wikipedia entry to claim that he's gay, when the actor (who recently got married) is pretty sure he's not. Of course, the problem here is that there's nothing that he can reasonably sue Wikipedia for. He's trying "libel, invasion of privacy and for using his name and likeness without his permission." None of these will stand, as all will quickly be dumped due to Section 230 of the CDA -- which you can all read about on Wikipedia. Now, he might have a stronger argument if he actually sued the individual making these changes, rather than Wikipedia itself, but even then, it's difficult to see the lawsuit getting very far. Update: In the comments people are saying that the UPI reporter got the story wrong, and the actual lawsuit is against the individual -- though, again it's difficult to see the lawsuit getting very far. So much for the "professional reporters" at an organization like UPI doing fact checking.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Court Doesn't Buy Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood's Argument: Puts His Google Demands On Hold
- Rogers Exec Pouts About VPNs, Publicly Dreams Of Canadian Ban
- AT&T's $30 'Don't Be Snooped On' Fee Is Even Worse Than Everybody Thought
- Why Do People Trust Wikipedia? Because An Argument Is Better Than A Lecture
- Group Of Major PR Firms Pledge To Play Nice On Wikipedia