Lunney v. Prodigy Services Co.
Lunney v. Prodigy Services Co. | |
---|---|
Court | New York Court of Appeals |
Full case name | Alexander G. Lunney v. Prodigy Services Company, et al. |
Decided | December 2 1999 |
Citation(s) | 723 N.E.2d 539; 94 N.Y.2d 242; 701 N.Y.S.2d 684 |
Case history | |
Prior action(s) | Defendant's motion for summary judgment denied, Sup. Ct. Westchester Cty., July 2, 1997; renewed motion for summary judgment denied, Sup. Ct., Jan. 14, 1998; rev'd, 250 A.D.2d 230 (1999) |
Subsequent action(s) | Cert. denied, 529 U.S. 1098 (2000) |
Holding | |
An internet chatroom provider could not be considered the publisher of defamatory material posted by an imposter account because of its passive role in monitoring the chatrooms. Appellate Division affirmed. | |
Court membership | |
Chief Judge | Judith S. Kaye |
Associate Judges | Joseph W. Bellacosa, George Bundy Smith, Howard A. Levine, Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick, Richard C. Wesley, Albert M. Rosenblatt |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Rosenblatt, joined by Kaye, Smith, Levine, Ciparick, Wesley |
Bellacosa took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. |
Lunney v. Prodigy Services Co., 94 N.Y.2d 242 (1999) is a leading U.S. law case on liability of internet service providers for defamation. The court held that Prodigy, an internet chatroom provider, was not considered a publisher of defamatory material posted from an imposter account due to its passive role in monitoring the chatrooms.
External links
This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 8/13/2011. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.