=============== ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/CAF/faq/netnews.liability =============== q: Does a University reduce its likely liability by screening Netnews and the Web for offensive articles, newsgroups, and pages? a: Not necessarily. By screening articles and newsgroups the University may *increase* its liability it two ways. (Aside: Elimination of liability should not be the University's only goal.) First, prior restraint is likely an illegal violation of the U.S. Constitution. According to the book _Law of the Student Press_ (in reference student newspapers) "Only two court cases have ever dealt with the question of prior review of college newspapers. Both cases ruled that such a practice is unconstitutional in public colleges." And: "a more recent decision struck down as violative of the First Amendment a university policy requiring students to obtain written permission from school officials prior to selling literature in the student union." Second, prior restaint likely *increases* the change a college will be liable for something a student writes. The _Law of the Student Press_ (in reference student newspapers) says "Only two [U.S.] court cases have considered the liability question, and in both cases the courts found that the institution was free from liability because control was in the hands of the students.{33,34} ... Thus, despite arguments by administrators that they need to prevent libel, it appears that just the opposite is true: Where administrators have not exercised control over the content of student publications, the courts have refused to hold their schools responsible for libel appearing in such publication. If, however, administrators exercise the power of prior review, then the court will also hold them and their schools liable for the contents of such publications. Encouraging the establishment of a clear-cut separation between school administration and editor functions may also result in the reduction of libel suits, for potential plaintiffs will realize that substantial funds are beyond their reach. ... {33} _Mazart v. State_ 441 N.Y.S.2d 600 (1981) {34} _Milliner v. Turner_ 436 So.2d 1300 (La. App. 1983)" The recent _Cubby v. Compuserve_ decision also suggests that a no-screening policy may be best. The judge wrote: "CompuServe has no more editorial control over such a publication than does a public library, bookstore or newsstand, and it would be no more feasible for CompuServe to examine every publication it carries for potentially defamatory statements than it would be for any other distributor to do so." Prior review also violates the principles of academic freedom. The Joint Statement on Rights and Freedoms of Students, the main statement of student academic freedom in the United States says this (in the context of student newspapers): "The student press should be free of censorship and advance approval of copy, and its editors and managers should be free to develop their own editorial policies and news coverage." Many schools have made this recommendation a contractual obligation putting it as a promise in the student code. - Carl ANNOTATED REFERENCES (All these documents are available on-line. Access information follows.) ================= law/stratton-oakmonth-v-prodigy ================= * Expression -- Liability -- Stratton Oakmonth v. Prodigy The text of the _Stratton Oakmonth v. Prodigy_ decision, in which a federal district judge said that Prodigy could be sued for allegedly defamatory statements posted to Prodigy forum because Prodigy exercised editorial control on that forum. ================= law/antonelli-v-hammond ================= * Expression -- Prior review An excerpt from the _Law of the Student Press_ saying that prior review in public colleges is unconstitutional. ================= law/cubby-v-compuserve.summary ================= * Expression -- Liability -- Cubby v. CompuServe Report of a federal district court case which said CompuServe could not be held liable for the defamatory content because it exercised no editorial control. ================= law/cubby-v-compuserve.text ================= * Expression -- Liability -- Cubby v. CompuServe The text of the Cubby v. CompuServe decision, in which CompuServe was found not liable for allegedly defamatory statements posted to a forum on the CompuServe Information Service because CompuServe did not exercise editorial control on that forum. ================= law/student-publications.misc ================= * Expression -- Offensive -- Student Publications -- Misc Quotes from the book _Law of the Student Press_ by the Student Press Law Center (1985,1988). They say that four-letter words are protected speech, that public universities are not likely to be liable for publications that they for which they do not control the contents, and that the _Hazelwood_ decision does not apply to universities. ================= law/stanley-v-magrath ================= * Expression -- Public Forum -- Closing -- Stanley v. Magrath Comments from _Public Schools Law: Teachers' and Students' Rights_ 2nd Ed. by Martha M. McCarthy and Nelda H. Cambron-McCabe, published in 1987 by Allyn and Bacon, Inc. It says, in part, "[a]lthough school boards are not obligated to support student papers, if a given publication was originally created as a free speech forum, removal of financial or other school board support can be construed as an unlawful effort to stifle free expression." Also, "school authorities cannot withdraw support from a student publication simply because of displeasure with the content" and "the content of a school-sponsored paper that is established as a medium for student expression cannot be regulated more closely than a nonsponsored paper". Also, it tells what to do about libel in student publications. ================= law/political-speech ================= * Expression -- Academic - Political Speech A letter from the ACLU to Princeton University explaining why a ban on on-line political speech is unnecessary and perhaps illegal. ================= academic/student.freedoms.aaup ================= * Student Freedoms (AAUP) Joint Statement on Rights and Freedoms of Students -- This is the main U.S. statement on student academic freedom. ================= academic/speech_codes.aaup ================= [No annotation available.] ================= faq/netnews.reading ================= * Netnews -- Policies on What Users Read q: Should my university remove (or restrict) Netnews newsgroups because some people find them offensive? If it doesn't have the resources to carry all newsgroups, how should newsgroups be selected? a: Material should not be restricted just because it is offensive to ... ================= faq/netnews.writing ================= * Netnews -- Policies on What Users Write q: Should my university allow students to post to Netnews? a: Yes. Free inquiry and free expression are an important part of a ... q: Should my university allow students to post to Netnews or have Web pages? a: Yes. Free inquiry and free expression are an important part of a ... ================= faq/censorship-and-harassment ================= * Censorship And Harassment q: Must/should universities ban material that some find offensive (from Netnews facilities, email, libraries, and student publications, etc) in order to comply with antiharassment laws? a: No. U.S. federal courts have said that harassing speech is ... ================= ================= If you have gopher, you can browse the CAF archive with the command gopher gopher.eff.org These document(s) are also available by anonymous ftp (the preferred method) and by email. To get the file(s) via ftp, do an anonymous ftp to ftp.eff.org, and then: cd /pub/CAF/law get stratton-oakmonth-v-prodigy cd /pub/CAF/law get antonelli-v-hammond cd /pub/CAF/law get cubby-v-compuserve.summary cd /pub/CAF/law get cubby-v-compuserve.text cd /pub/CAF/law get student-publications.misc cd /pub/CAF/law get stanley-v-magrath cd /pub/CAF/law get political-speech cd /pub/CAF/academic get student.freedoms.aaup cd /pub/CAF/academic get speech_codes.aaup cd /pub/CAF/faq get netnews.reading cd /pub/CAF/faq get netnews.writing cd /pub/CAF/faq get censorship-and-harassment To get the file(s) by email, send email to ftpmail@decwrl.dec.com Include the line(s): connect ftp.eff.org cd /pub/CAF/law get stratton-oakmonth-v-prodigy cd /pub/CAF/law get antonelli-v-hammond cd /pub/CAF/law get cubby-v-compuserve.summary cd /pub/CAF/law get cubby-v-compuserve.text cd /pub/CAF/law get student-publications.misc cd /pub/CAF/law get stanley-v-magrath cd /pub/CAF/law get political-speech cd /pub/CAF/academic get student.freedoms.aaup cd /pub/CAF/academic get speech_codes.aaup cd /pub/CAF/faq get netnews.reading cd /pub/CAF/faq get netnews.writing cd /pub/CAF/faq get censorship-and-harassment