Defamation is a false statement of material fact that damages the reputation of the target. Internet Defamation presents a dilemma to courts who have to balance the damage to the reputation of one person against the Internet free speech rights of another.
Under basic defamation law principles, there are two types of defamation, libel and slander. Libel is a published defamatory statement. Under traditional defamation law principles, slander is spoken statements. With the advent of the Internet, the terms Internet defamation, Internet libel, and Internet slander are used interchangeably . However, in the true sense of the word, slander only applies to spoken statements and therefore there is no such thing as Internet slander. The terms is nonetheless used to refer to Internet defamation.
The following are types of Internet Defamation:
Truth - A statement that is true cannot be defamatory. However, some States recognize other torts, such as false light invasion of privacy. In this case, truth is not a defense.
Opinion - Only statement of facts can be defamatory, opinions are not. However, if you are a victim of Internet defamation and the post, blog entry, or forum article contains the qualification "in my opinion," you may still pursue your Internet defamation claim. Disguising a defamatory statement as an opinion does not make it such.
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act - Sections 230(c)(1) and 230(e)(3) provide that "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," and that "[n]o cause of action may be brought and no liability may be imposed under any State or local law that is inconsistent with this section." However, there are several limitations and exceptions to this rule. It is interesting how many operators of Internet sites attempt to find their unwarranted solace behind this law when many times, given the specific design or operation of their website, the immunity provision may not apply.
Additional discussion regarding Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act may be found on Domingo Rivera's Blog. Some articles regarding this issue include:
