From: [c--w] at [cd.columbus.oh.us] (Jim Crowley) Newsgroups: misc.legal.moderated Subject: Legal issues of electronic publishing Date: 15 Jun 1994 18:02:08 -0400 The Columbus Dispatch is currently involved in a test edition through the Greater Columbus Free-Net, a consortium of phone, cable and public entities. We are using hardware through sponsorship agreements with The Ohio State University. The question I told the board I would posit is: Has anyone seen good documentation about how to legally protect yourself as an electronic publisher? I am an attorney, but the formal legal research in this arena is almost nil. The library industry has done more, but i wanted the group collectively to answer some of these questions, and provide any samples you might be considering: - Are your usership agreements predicated on any promise of people to conform to good taste? - Can you even try to define that, given the subjectiveness of "community standards?" - How does anyone who publishes in a situation where users can access internet deal with the fact that some Usenet groups are unsuitable for small children, etc.? - If you are in a situation, as we are, where there are dozens of information providers, do you deny access to groups such as the KKK, or is the cure for "bad speech, even more speech?" - Do you have a policy for disconnecting an information provider who violates whatever your standards of decency might be? - If you are in a situation where you have invited info from schools, and the schools include religious ones, can you deny them the right to print religious material (our free-net is supported by state, county and city dollars as well as corporate sponsorship? - Do any of you carry separate insurance against lawsuits? Do you use national, local or in-house legal counsel, if any, when it comes to electronic publishing? - Has anyone done what we have presumed was necessary in past experiments: negotiate secondary-use agreements with AP or other wire services? Again, please answer me via electronic mail. I am sure there will be other questions forthcoming For starters: Cubby Inc. v. Compuserve Inc. 776 F. Supp. 135 (S.D.N.Y. 1991) and Anthony J. Sassan, "Cubby, Inc. v. Compuserve Inc.: Comparing Apples to Oranges: The Need for New Media Classification," Software Law Journal 5 (1992). -- [c--w] at [cd.columbus.oh.us] == Jim Crowley