This HTML5 document contains 59 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
dctermshttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
yago-reshttp://yago-knowledge.org/resource/
dbohttp://dbpedia.org/ontology/
foafhttp://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
n15http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/776/135/2340509/
n21https://global.dbpedia.org/id/
yagohttp://dbpedia.org/class/yago/
dbthttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
freebasehttp://rdf.freebase.com/ns/
n17https://web.archive.org/web/20090429091608/http:/www.internetdefamationlawblog.com/communications_decency_act_immunity/
n19http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:FilePath/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
owlhttp://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
wikipedia-enhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
dbchttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:
provhttp://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
dbphttp://dbpedia.org/property/
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
n18https://web.archive.org/web/20090402173045/http:/www.law.unimelb.edu.au/cmcl/publications/
wikidatahttp://www.wikidata.org/entity/
dbrhttp://dbpedia.org/resource/
n13https://www.eff.org/files/filenode/wikimedia/

Statements

Subject Item
dbr:Cubby,_Inc._v._CompuServe_Inc.
rdf:type
yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100 yago:Event100029378 yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity yago:WikicatUnitedStatesDistrictCourtCases yago:Abstraction100002137 yago:Case107308889 yago:Happening107283608
rdfs:label
Cubby, Inc. v. CompuServe Inc.
rdfs:comment
Cubby, Inc. v. CompuServe Inc., 776 F. Supp. 135 (S.D.N.Y. 1991) was a 1991 court decision in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York which held that Internet service providers were subject to traditional defamation law for their hosted content. The case resolved a claim of libel against CompuServe, an Internet service provider that hosted allegedly defamatory content in one of its forums. The case established a precedent for Internet service provider liability by applying defamation law, originally intended for hard copies of written works, to the Internet medium. The court held that although CompuServe did host defamatory content on its forums, CompuServe was merely a distributor, rather than a publisher, of the content. As a distributor, CompuServe could o
dbp:name
Cubby, Inc. v. CompuServe Inc.
foaf:depiction
n19:USDCSDNY.svg
dcterms:subject
dbc:United_States_Free_Speech_Clause_case_law dbc:United_States_District_Court_for_the_Southern_District_of_New_York_cases dbc:United_States_Internet_case_law dbc:1991_in_United_States_case_law dbc:United_States_defamation_case_law dbc:CompuServe
dbo:wikiPageID
613114
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
1058367079
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:Internet_service_provider dbc:CompuServe dbr:Section_230_of_the_Communications_Decency_Act dbr:Compuserve dbr:Summary_judgment dbr:Peter_K._Leisure dbr:Defamation dbr:Libel dbc:United_States_District_Court_for_the_Southern_District_of_New_York_cases dbr:CompuServe dbr:Stratton_Oakmont,_Inc._v._Prodigy_Services_Co. dbr:United_States_District_Court_for_the_Southern_District_of_New_York dbc:United_States_Internet_case_law dbr:Unfair_competition dbc:United_States_defamation_case_law dbr:United_States_defamation_law dbc:1991_in_United_States_case_law dbc:United_States_Free_Speech_Clause_case_law
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
n13:bauerorder.pdf n15: n17: n18:Defamation10.html
owl:sameAs
freebase:m.02wl92 wikidata:Q5192191 n21:4jD2P yago-res:Cubby,_Inc._v._CompuServe_Inc.
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dbt:Infobox_United_States_District_Court_Case dbt:Reflist
dbo:thumbnail
n19:USDCSDNY.svg?width=300
dbp:citations
776
dbp:court
dbr:United_States_District_Court_for_the_Southern_District_of_New_York
dbp:holding
CompuServe was merely a distributor, rather than a publisher of content on its forums, and hence could only be liable for defamation if it knew, or had reason to know, of the defamatory nature of the content.
dbp:imagesize
150
dbp:keywords
dbr:Defamation
dbo:abstract
Cubby, Inc. v. CompuServe Inc., 776 F. Supp. 135 (S.D.N.Y. 1991) was a 1991 court decision in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York which held that Internet service providers were subject to traditional defamation law for their hosted content. The case resolved a claim of libel against CompuServe, an Internet service provider that hosted allegedly defamatory content in one of its forums. The case established a precedent for Internet service provider liability by applying defamation law, originally intended for hard copies of written works, to the Internet medium. The court held that although CompuServe did host defamatory content on its forums, CompuServe was merely a distributor, rather than a publisher, of the content. As a distributor, CompuServe could only be held liable for defamation if it knew, or had reason to know, of the defamatory nature of the content. As CompuServe had made no effort to review the large volume of content on its forums, it could not be held liable for the defamatory content. The application of traditional defamation law to the Internet context was soon to create controversy in Stratton Oakmont, Inc. v. Prodigy Services Co., in which a service provider was found liable for defamation on the grounds of good-faith attempts to filter objectionable content. In 1996, service providers were granted immunity as publishers and distributors by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act as an incentive to moderate posted material.
dbp:dateDecided
1991-10-29
dbp:judge
dbr:Peter_K._Leisure
prov:wasDerivedFrom
wikipedia-en:Cubby,_Inc._v._CompuServe_Inc.?oldid=1058367079&ns=0
dbo:wikiPageLength
8282
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
wikipedia-en:Cubby,_Inc._v._CompuServe_Inc.