Legal Question in Civil Rights Law in California

Civil Rights Attorneys oppinions wanted...

If I live in one State and a person files a CIVIL suit in another State and a defendant doesnt show up for whatever reason can a judge or State Attorney issue a FUGATIVE FROM JUSTICE WARRANT - and a INDIRECT CRIMINAL CONTEMPT ??????

NOTE... i was not living in the state where complaint was filed therefore i couldnt run from the state also....

Then after all this because of blog postings on the internet exposing these people for breaking the law ( thats why civil suit was filed to shut blogger up ) can a judge issue an order on the defendant telling him to remove all posts against the individuals on servers he doesnt own like ripoffreport.com or he does jail time. Below is a statement from ripoffreport.com about removing posts.. this is just one of many web sites comments were posted on. No threats were ever made...

Do you really want to sue Ripoff Report?

You should read this information before filing a lawsuit against Ripoff Report or the Founder ED Magedson.

Do you have any of the following questions?

�There's a false report about me on this site!!! What can I do?

�If I get the original author of a report to send a retraction, will Ripoff Report remove the complaint?

�My lawyer says you have to remove information upon notice that a report is false, is that true?

�My lawyer says Ripoff Report has to verify complaints before they are posted and I can sue if you don't, is that true?

�If I file a lawsuit against Ripoff Report, will that get my complaint removed?

�I heard that the Ripoff Report pays Google to get higher rankings in search results, is that true?

�Other websites have said that Ed Magedson writes reports and titles to reports, is that true?

�I want the name of someone who posted an anonymous report about me. How can I get that?

If you answered 'YES' to any of these questions, please read this information before filing a lawsuit against Ripoff Report or its founder, Ed Magedson.

1. Introduction

From time to time, the Ripoff Report receives notices from companies and individuals who claim that false or inaccurate information about them has been posted on this site. Sometimes we receive letters from lawyers with similar allegations. These people sometimes threaten to sue Ripoff Report for defamation and other claims unless the statements they do not like are removed.

If you are considering sending us a notice or demand (or if you have already done so), this page is intended to provide you with information that may help you to better understand the situation and your rights, as well as the rights of the people who post reports here. You need to understand that threats against Ripoff Report are not effective, nor will they result in the removal of any reports. Here's why.

2. Our Policy: Why We NEVER Remove Reports

Since the Ripoff Report was started in 1998, our policy has always remained the same ���� we never remove reports. We will not remove reports even when they are claimed to contain defamatory statements and even if the original author requests it. Some people have criticized this policy as being unfair, but we strongly feel this policy is essential, fair, and far better than the alternative � rampant censorship.

The reasons for our policy are simple.

First, this site is most effective when all complaints are maintained and preserved so that over time patterns of truly bad business practices are exposed. If we removed reports after a certain period of time, this would provide consumers with less information to use when evaluating a company. Unlike the Better Business Bureau (which deletes complaints after just 36 months), we maintain a permanent record of all complaints. This ensures that our viewers have more information rather than less.

Second, if we removed complaints on request this would give companies an incentive to pressure authors to remove true and accurate reports in exchange for money or simply to avoid a costly lawsuit. It�s a well-known fact that most people aren�t willing or able to spend $100k in legal fees defending a defamation lawsuit, so even when a person has written a 100% true report, there is a huge amount of pressure for them to just remove it when threatened with legal action.

For that reason, we will never agree to remove reports, even if someone can show that a report is probably inaccurate. By having this policy, we take leverage away from companies who threaten or pressure a customer hoping to get them to retract a valid complaint. Even if this means that one or more questionable reports are left up, we think that removal of any reports would ultimately make this site less credible and thus less effective as a tool for educating consumers. That's why we have made this strict policy decision.

If this seems unfair or unreasonable, consider this -- if someone sues you in court and makes outlandish claims that are completely false, you can fight the case and win and at the end a judgment will be entered in your favor proving that you were right and your accuser was wrong. However, the court clerk will NOT destroy the file or seal the records of the case simply because you won. Even when a lawsuit is shown to be 100% baseless, the documents remain part of a public record that is maintained for years or perhaps forever (trust us -- we KNOW about this from first-hand experience). In this situation, the remedy you are entitled to is a court order or judgment proving that you were right, not the destruction of public records about the case.

3. The Law You Need To Know - The Communications Decency Act

Because we will not remove reports, Ripoff Report has been sued on many occasions based on the content which our users have created and posted. If you are considering suing Ripoff Report because of a report which you claim is defamatory, you should be aware that to date, Ripoff Report has never lost such a case (with one exception; explained below). This is because of a federal law called the Communications Decency Act or "CDA", 47 U.S.C. � 230. Because this important law is not well known, we want to take a moment to explain the law, and to also explain that the filing of frivolous lawsuits can have serious consequences for those who file them, both parties and their attorneys.

The CDA is part of our federal laws. An excellent Wikipedia article discussing the history of the law can be found here.

In short, the CDA provides that when a user writes and posts material on an �interactive website� such as Ripoff Report, the site itself cannot, in most cases, be held legally responsible for the posted material. Specifically, 47 U.S.C. � 230(c)(1) states, "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."

Because the reports on Ripoff Report are authored by users of the site, we cannot be legally regarded as the "publisher or speaker" of the reports contained here, and hence we are not liable for reports even if they contain false or inaccurate information. The same law applies to sites like FaceBook, MySpace, and CraigsList � users who post information on these sites are responsible for what they write, but the operators of the sites are not.

The reasons for this rule are simple. Websites cannot possibly monitor the accuracy of the huge volume of information which their users may choose to post. If an angry plaintiff were permitted to hold a website liable for information that the site did not create, this would stifle free speech as fewer and fewer sites would be willing to permit users to post anything at all. See generally Batzel v. Smith, 333 F.3d 1018, 1027-28 (9th Cir. 2003) (recognizing, "Making interactive computer services and their users liable for the speech of third parties would severely restrict the information available on the Internet. Section 230 [of the CDA] therefore sought to prevent lawsuits from shutting down websites and other services on the Internet.")

Based on the protection extended by the CDA, Ripoff Report has successfully defended more than 20 lawsuits in both state and federal courts. Each time, the courts have consistently found that the CDA shields Ripoff Report from any claims seeking to treat it as the speaker or publisher of information posted by a third party.

Here are just a few recent examples:

�Intellectual Art Multimedia, Inc. v. Melewski, 2009 WL 2915273 (N.Y.Sup. Sept. 11, 2009) (claims against Ripoff Report dismissed for failure to state a claim due to CDA immunity)

�GW Equity, LLC v. Xcentric Ventures, LLC, 2009 WL 62173 (N.D.Tex. 2009) (summary judgment entered in favor of Ripoff Report based on CDA immunity)

�Global Royalties, Ltd. v. Xcentric Ventures, LLC, 544 F.Supp.2d 929 (D.Ariz. 2008) (claims against Ripoff Report dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) without leave to amend based on CDA immunity)

�Global Royalties, Ltd. v. Xcentric Ventures, LLC, 2007 WL 2949002 (D.Ariz. Oct. 10, 2007) (claims against Ripoff Report dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) based on CDA immunity)

�Whitney Info. Network, Inc. v. Xcentric Ventures, LLC, 2008 WL 450095; 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11632 (M.D.Fla. Feb. 15, 2008) (summary judgment entered in favor of Ripoff Report based on CDA immunity)

So, why should you care about the CDA? Well, it's simple -- if someone posts false information about you on the Ripoff Report, the CDA prohibits you from holding us liable for the statements which others have written. You can always sue the author if you want, but you can�t sue Ripoff Report just because we provide a forum for speech.

Now, to be 100% accurate -- there was ONE case where a predecessor website to Ripoff Report was sued in a foreign country and a default judgment was entered in the plaintiff's favor. However, when the plaintiff tried to domesticate that judgment in the United States, Ripoff Report fought it. The case was resolved and the judgment was removed without any money being paid.

4. Other websites have said a new case shows that Ripoff Report is no longer protected by the CDA; is that true?

On April 3, 2008, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion in a case called Fair Housing Council of San Fernando Valley v. Roommates.com, L.L.C., 521 F.3d 1157 (9th Cir. 2008). Some people (okay, lawyers, mostly), initially argued that Roommates narrowed the CDA significantly, exposing Ripoff Report to liability even with regard to information posted by third parties. Sorry folks, but since Roommates was decided, other courts have agreed that the facts of the case are unique and the outcome is really limited to those facts. The decision in GW Equity v. Xcentric Ventures cited above specifically discusses the Ninth Circuit�s decision in Roommates in detail and then concludes that it does not affect our immunity under the CDA.

5. But what if the original author asks us to remove a report? Why doesn't Ripoff Report have to take a report down when the author requests this?

There are many reasons why Ripoff Report does not remove reports even if the original author has asked us to do so. First of all, if someone contacts us and claims to be the author of Report #1234, we have no way of knowing whether they really ARE the author.

Second, as stated above -- as a matter of policy, Rip-off Report does not want big companies to bully individuals into asking us to remove their truthful reports. To prevent this, we simply will not agree to remove reports, ever, thus eliminating that incentive.

Third, every time a report is submitted to us, the author must read and agree to the following terms (under "Step 6 - Submit Report"): "By posting this report/rebuttal, I attest this report is valid. I am giving Ripoff Report irrevocable rights to post it on this web site. I acknowledge that once I post my report, it will not be removed, even at my request. Of course, I can always update my report to reflect new developments by clicking on UPDATE." Since this statement is clear, our users should understand that by submitting a report, they are creating a permanent record. If this isn�t something they want to do, they should not submit a report in the first place.

This does not mean you are powerless. There are MANY ways to respond!

Just because Ripoff Report won�t remove reports does not mean you have no options. On the contrary, you can write a rebuttal explaining your position. Rebuttals are 100% free, and we strongly encourage you to use this resource since they can be extremely effective.

If you are a business owner and you discover that the report was written by an unhappy customer, do not despair. You can turn that negative into a positive. Use the complaint as an opportunity to make things right with your customer, and ask the customer to submit an update confirming that their concern has been satisfactorily resolved. Even if the customer won't submit an update, you can write a rebuttal stating what you have done to make things right. As we often say, every business will receive complaints. Customers know that. Having a complaint does not mean your company is bad. It is the manner in which you choose to deal with your customers that will have the biggest impact on your reputation, so treat every complaint as an opportunity to show customers that you DO care about treating them well even when things go wrong. Of course, if you don't care about making things right with your customers, that's something the public has a right to know.

If you think a report is fake and/or written by a competitor, feel free to say so in your rebuttal. Your rebuttal can also demand that the customer post some form of proof to back up their story. If the customer fails to do so, that will speak volumes about their credibility (or lack thereof).

Whether or not you choose to post a rebuttal, under the CDA you cannot hold Ripoff Report legally responsible for material written by third parties.

To be clear, all of the reports and rebuttals on the Ripoff Report have been authored by our users, not by us. For more than five years, no employee or agent of Ripoff Report has posted any content on Ripoff Report about a company without the company's written permission. Also, Ripoff Report does not create the titles or headings of the reports. The titles are written by the author of the report. You can easily confirm this by following the steps on this site for submitting a report. You will see that as part of the process, the submitter constructs the title, not us.

1 Answer from Attorneys

Related Questions & Answers

More Civil Rights Law questions and answers in California

Looking for something else?