What exactly is Twitter? Well, that depends. In a recent Australian court battle concerning the social networking giant, there is some question as to whether Twitter is akin to a publisher of information, like a newspaper, or whether it’s more like a phone company which simply allows the transmission of messages. It’s no doubt a combination of the two, but with the legal landscape around social networking sites struggling to keep up with their enigmatic nature, it means there’s no clear answer when it comes to lawsuits.
Take a recent example detailed on Gigaom.com in which Australian TV personality Marieke Hardy made a tweet which falsely accused a man of setting up a blog to attack her. Though she was forced to pay somewhere around $15,000 in defamation damages, her victim wasn’t satisfied and is now going after Twitter as the message was featured on its homepage and also retweeted by Hardy’s followers. But is Twitter responsible for its user-generated content?
If Twitter did not interfere with user messages at all, the answer might be more clear-cut. Its role would be more like a phone company’s, a kind of company which doesn’t get sued for defamation. The problem is that Twitter does interfere. It often deletes post and blocks users for illegal activity, and because of this, some experts argue that the social network should be at least partially liable for the content it hosts.
In the US, blogs and companies like Twitter are protected from defamation cases under the Good Samaritan Act. But elsewhere the story is different, which leaves Twitter, a website used worldwide, open to lawsuits in other jurisdictions. Even if Australia comes to a concensus on what exactly Twitter is, there’s nothing to say other countries won’t disagree.
See the full story on Gigaom.com