Legal Opinion
Barrett v. Rosenthal
California Supreme Court
Decided November 20, 2006No. S122953PublishedCited by 90 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CORRIGAN, J.
In the Communications Decency Act of 1996, Congress declared: “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.” (47 U.S.C. § 230(c)(1).)1 “No cause of action may be brought and no liability may be imposed under any State or local law that is inconsistent with this section.” (§ 230(e)(3).)
These provisions have been widely and consistently interpreted to confer broad immunity against defamation liability for those who use the Internet to publish information…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- Consumer Product Safety Commission v. GTE Sylvania, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Duncan v. WalkerSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Gustafson v. Alloyd Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Reno v. American Civil Liberties UnionSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- United States v. X-Citement Video, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1994
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by90 opinions
- People v. LintonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2013
- Universal Communication Systems, Inc. v. Lycos, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2007
- Wong v. JingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- NYGÅRD, INC. v. Uusi-KerttulaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Delfino v. Agilent Technologies, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2006
85 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.