I found this today and thought it might be of interest:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

chicagotribune.com >> Nation/World
Web sites, users get immunity in defamation case

Los Angeles Times
Published November 21, 2006

SAN FRANCISCO -- Internet users and providers cannot be held liable for posting defamatory material written by someone else, the California Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Monday.

"The prospect of blanket immunity for those who intentionally redistribute defamatory statements on the Internet has disturbing implications," Justice Carol Corrigan wrote for the court. But immunity "serves to protect online freedom of expression and to encourage self-regulation."


Monday's decision was consistent with holdings by many federal appeals courts and one other state high court. "The courts are now uniform," said Ann Brick, who represented the ACLU of Northern California in the case. But lawyers on both sides said the California Supreme Court went further than other courts by giving immunity to all Internet users except the original author.

"What you couldn't put in your print newspaper, you can put in your Internet newspaper," said Christopher Grell, who represented two doctors who said they were defamed.

Mark Goldowitz, the lawyer for the defendant, cited a line in the ruling that the decision brought "the law of libel from the Guttenberg era to the cyberspace era."

The decision overturned a Court of Appeal ruling and threw out a lawsuit that claimed Ilena Rosenthal, a San Diego activist for breast-implant victims, defamed Dr. Stephen Barrett and Dr. Terry Polevoy on the Web sites of two news groups.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just thought I'd post it.