A Chicago fair housing group has sued groundbreaking Web site Craigslist for allegedly publishing discriminatory advertisements, a case that could test the legal liabilities of online ad venues.
The suit is part of an emerging attempt by housing watchdogs nationally to hold online classified sites to the same strict standards as the publishers of print classifieds, such as newspapers.
The suit is potentially significant because it suggests that the rules for an Internet site should be the same as for a traditional publisher, in which every ad should be vetted to conform with the law. But that notion contradicts the way the Internet has blossomed, where informal communities tend to police themselves and free expression is valued.
Kind of a damning contrast, isn’t it, between traditional newspapers and a place where “free expression is valued.”
Seems to me that free expression should be valued everywhere, and that suits like this should lead us to rethink the rules governing newspapers.
UPDATE: Blogging lawprof Eric Goldman says the suit is bogus: “If this sounds familiar, it’s because Roommate.com was sued under the exact same law for exactly the same behavior and won an easy victory under 47 USC 230. The Roommate.com case is on appeal, so perhaps the appellate court will see things differently. Otherwise, I don’t understand the thinking of plaintiffs–particularly a group of lawyers–who bring lawsuits like this in the face of a clear federal exculpatory statute and directly-on-point adverse precedent.” Based on this obervation, if I were Craigslist I’d think about going for sanctions — but I’m aggressive that way.
UPDATE: More thoughts here, including speculation that threatened newspapers are actually behind the suit. Doubtful, but an entertaining thought.