Section 230(c)(1) of the CDA proffers to web-based service providers the immunity from liability accruing from content they either did not wholly or partially develop (Internet Law, 2008). As such, the scope and broadness of the immunity provided by the CDA were what was in question in the Doe v. Myspace case. In essence, the court considers liability to the service provider for the content they generate, publish, and advertise but not what they delete or remove regardless of how defamatory the content is. Based on this precept, the 13-year old Doe’s daughter was liable for her actions by creating a fake profile and willingly exchanging contacts with 19-year-old Pete Solis. Deductively, in upholding the decision, the sexual assault that Doe claimed to have been perpetrated against her daughter happened outside the auspices of the service provider; that is, it happened away from the internet environment of MySpace (offline).
Thus, in thwarting the parent’s claims and allegations of negligence and gross negligence against the networking site, the Fifth Circuit Court referred to the tenet that the 13-year old user had misrepresented her age (18 years) and therefore her profile made public. In essence, MySpace protection policies maintain that all profiles made with ages below 14 or fifteen years are made private by default (Volftsun, 2008). Thus, by defrauding the provider’s age verification software meant to protect the minor by misrepresenting her age, the profile became public making the teenager fully liable and responsible for the consequences. Under section 230(c)(1) of the CDA, MySpace had no liability to publishing the teenager’s content to the public since her misrepresentation meant she was an adult. Therefore, the court firmly maintained that as per the CDA, internet service providers could not be held accountable for content generated by their users. Reiterating these sentiments is FindLaw (2019), which reports that as long as the third party or user gives published content willingly, the interactive service provider receives full immunity.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Ultimately, as per the provisions of the CDA, it can be concluded that Doe's allegations and invocation of the premises liability were a disingenuous ploy to circumvent the CDA 230. However, web-based service providers are partially responsible for published content but outside the confines of the CDA. As such, the question remains, how will service providers such as MySpace know that the content or profile generated by the user is factual or made up? Therefore, discussions and future cyber protections should be based on this inquiry.
References
FindLaw. (2019). Doe v. MySpace Inc. Thomson Reuters . Retrieved from https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-5th-circuit/1474969.html
Internet Law. Communications Decency Act. Federal District Court Denies § 230 Immunity to Website That Solicits Illicit Content. FTC v. Accusearch, Inc., No. 06-CV-105, 2007 WL 4356786 (D. Wyo. Sept. 28, 2007). (2008). Harvard Law Review, 121 (8), 2246-2253. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40042741
Volftsun, A. (2008). Doe v. Myspace, Inc.: Fifth Circuit Holds No Safety Exception to Communications Decency Act ISP Immunity. Harvard Journal of Law and Technology . Retrieved from https://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/doe-v-myspace-inc
