Web Forums: legality editing posts?

forum posts legal

[jakobn]

I've been asked to edit one of the posts to our forum before clearing it. Is this legal? I'm sure I read somewhere that you can't do this without running into legal difficulties.

JN

[rogerd]

Yes, you can. You should clearly state that in your TOS, of course. It's also polite to include a note if a post is edited (as is done here at WebmasterWorld) - that makes it far less likely that a poster will feel his post has been sabotaged.

If you do edit a post, I think it's a good idea to make sure you aren't changing the sense of the post. If your edits are so significant that the poster might feel his point is lost, it might be better to delete it.

[jakobn]

Thanks rogerd.

[mgream]

I wouldn't edit this unless you have it clearly in your TOS (either as a general rule, or a specific rule).

I would reject the entire message as not being appropriate because it doesn't meet the charter or acceptable levels of the forum and state why you are rejecting it: allow the poster to make adjustments and resubmit.

Keeping a history of changes is probably not good enough - the fact is that you're editing it. If this is how you want the nature of your forums to be, then you probably need to make it explicit in the TOS (as mentioned above).

I think it also puts you in a dubious legal situation because now you are a co-author of the message, and taking some of the responsibility. Say the message results in a legal case (e.g. someone wants to sue the poster because the message alleges something defamatory), then the poster could claim they didn't write the defamatory part of it, you did because you edit the posts. And even if you make it clear what you have been editing, the poster may then try to stick it on you by saying that you somehow personally authorised the message, and so are in some way liable. Of course, if you have your TOS set up correctly, then none of this can happen :-). I don't know exactly how realistic this scenario is, but my point is that it seems like not the safest way to play the game.

[BlueSky]

If you live in the US, Sec. 230. (c) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 [fcc.gov] protects you from legal liability if you are acting as a "Good Samaritan" in blocking or screening offensive material in other people's posts. Once you step out of the censor role into active editing, then you take on legal liability for the content. This has been tested a number of times in courts here. As long as forum providers remain in a passive role, judges have thrown out lawsuits against them for what was said by other people.

As for editing beyond censorship, the author (not you) owns the copyright to his words. So, you need his permission to change it. I guess you could insert a condition into your TOS where posters agree to your editorial changes for anything they submit. However, I've read cases here where judges have ruled passive TOS' are not considered legally binding contracts. Visitors must actively acknowledge someway that they've read it.

[mgream]

>>>>
However, I've read cases here where judges have ruled passive TOS' are not considered legally binding contracts. Visitors must actively acknowledge someway that they've read it.
<<<<

That is correct.

There should be a "click-wrap" agreement. The way to do this is to make users register once (even if only with username and password) to be part of the forum, and include the TOS as an explicit agreement in that process. Then with posts to the forum, provide a clear statement that makes the poster aware of the original TOS that they agreed to.

This site is a good example of how to do it.

Legal cases can hinge on these issues, so it is very important to get it right.