![LILIAN EDWARDS AND ANDREAS RÜHMKORF UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD [email_address] [email_address] BILETA, VIENNA, MARCH 2010 Ratemylegalrisk.com ?: legal issues around online rating sites](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/ratemylegalrisknew-100420123254-phpapp01/85/ratemylegalrisknew-1-320.jpg)
![Types of rating websites ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Destaque
Semelhante a Ratemylegalrisknew
Semelhante a Ratemylegalrisknew (20)
Ratemylegalrisknew
- 1. LILIAN EDWARDS AND ANDREAS RÜHMKORF UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD [email_address] [email_address] BILETA, VIENNA, MARCH 2010 Ratemylegalrisk.com ?: legal issues around online rating sites
- 3. Rating of services: qype.com (Germany)
- 4. Rating of character: Dontdatehimgirl.com
- 5. A mixture of the two: Ratemyteachers.com (USA)
Notas do Editor
- Iwantgreatcare.org had libel threats but still seems to be up – williseemytutor.com was taken down. But it was actually drawn from public info! With site adding own’s errors and libels! So not really libel treats against UGC at all – But he acknowledged that the site was in its "testing phase" and admitted that it should contain more caveats about the data. The website makes clear that staff-to-student ratios supplied are for the university as a whole - not individual subjects - but it still offers damning judgments. A nationwide search of law departments, for example, places the universities of Edge Hill and Luton (which became Bedfordshire University at the beginning of this academic year) at the bottom of the pile. Students contemplating studying law at Bedfordshire are told: "This university is rated Shocking! as (sic) you should consider going somewhere else." And those considering law at Edge Hill are told: "This university is rated Rubbish as it looks like there is not a chance in hell of ever seeing your lecturers outside of lectures because they may be horrendously over allocated." Would an FB profile or reply be “literary”? I doubt it but more so than a rating site? Are any UGC sites “jnlistic”. Blog sites yes (Art 29 has agreed on this).
- ratemyMD.com let me go in, rate a Sheffield UK GP I’d never see and displayed it – no registration, no email given , nothing!
- We only noticed in UK no immunity under art 14 for DPD when trying to work out how Italy could hold Google/YT responsible for a video which invaded privacy of a Down’s syndrome boy. ! Roommates - Fair Housing Council of San Fernando Valley v. Roommates.com, LLC , 521 F.3d 1157 (9th Cir. 2008) ( en banc ). [18] The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected immunity for the Roommates.com roommate matching service for claims brought under the federal Fair Housing Act [19] and California housing discrimination laws [20] . The court concluded that the manner in which the service elicited information from users concerning their roommate preferences (by having dropdowns specifying gender, presence of children, and sexual orientation), and the manner in which it utilized that information in generating roommate matches (by eliminating profiles that did not match user specifications), the matching service created or developed the information claimed to violate the FHA, and thus was responsible for it as an "information content provider." The court upheld immunity for the descriptions posted by users in the “Additional Comments” section because these were entirely created by users. ((re liable for set form housing ads being discriminatory to eg black prospective tenants) But such liability resisted in various CraigsList cases, where short user ads listed. Seems to me like rating sites nearer the former..
- Guardian “ "British professors beware!" RateMyProfessor.com is soliciting feedback from students in the UK.” april 2006
- Re point 3 - (The “PR society” problem – cf Firsht v Raphael – gossip columns , outing sites, fan sites ? ) Seems fair enough you can take down your own photo on a UGC site – or its tagging – but what happens to SNSs when in name of privacy I can stop anyone even discussing me? And are there public intersts? Rt to know? Political dissent? More exception for these built into libel law historically than DP law ??