Complicated threatened lawsuit here (not for me fortunately), but basically Person A tweeted a picture of Person B’s kids with some very offensive remarks attached to it. Then Person C retweets it.
Person B makes up with A but A still doesn’t remove the tweet. Now Person B is threatening to sue Person C for Libel and Slander as well as hate crimes related stuff for Person C retweeting Person A. Person C responds that the Person he should be seeing is Person A and just letting Person A keep it up without sueing him, Person C legally has not committed anything worth sueing over.
Who’s right? This is basically two questions
Can you sue someone for simply retweeting something libelous?
Can you sue someone for retweeting something while not actually suing the source?
Under traditional state defamation law, a republisher of false and defamatory statements is liable to the same extent as the original publisher. That is, there is no protection simply for repeating or reprinting something spoken or written by another. Therefore, under traditional defamation law, the plaintiff almost certainly pled facts sufficient to support a defamation claim against Reid.
Why, then, was the cause of action based on Reid’s retweet voluntarily dismissed from the case before she even filed a motion? The answer lies in a statute created at the dawn of the internet age: the Communications Decency Act.[1] In 1996, Congress passed the CDA, at least in part, as a direct response to the decision in Stratton Oakmont v. Prodigy Services Co.[2] In that case, an internet service provider was found liable for defamatory statements created by unidentified posters on an internet bulletin board. As indicated above, under traditional publisher-liability maxims, a publisher of false and defamatory statements is liable regardless of whether the publisher wrote the statement. In other words, publishers were historically held strictly liable for the republication of defamatory material.
Basically, retweeting isn’t defamation for the same reason that the SDMB owners can’t be sued for defamation that occurs on the board. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
And of course, technically speaking you can sue anyone for anything. I’m presuming you meant suing with a likelihood of winning.
Traditional publishers can be sued because they choose what to publish. A newspaper has limited space, so it does not usually publish every letter to the editor - they pick and choose, presumably based on content. A bulletin board-style website, OTOH, has no limits and does not pick and choose. Often, they do not (and cannot practically) review every post submitted by a third party before allowing it to be visible. “Section 230” therefore prevents a website that allows third-party posters to provide content from being held liable for that content, even if they do try to censor inappropriate content. (Earlier arguments were that if you tried to censor content, you should now be liable for what you did not censor).
Without this protection, it would be alomost impossible to provide services like exTwitter or Straight Dope or TikTok. The internet was equated to a phone system, the provider could not control what went across their system.
I am surprised this protection extends to those who repost, since they specifically choose the content; but - I guess that’s the way the law works. I see an easy way for anyone to libel someone else with impunity, by using an anonymous untraceable(?) account and reposting.
The California Supreme Court, in its infinite wisdom decided that holding someone responsible for re-publishing libelous material online would chill ‘opportunities for cultural development,’ and stifle ‘myriad avenues for intellectual activity’.
So, even if the other complications about retweeting didn’t exist, posting something offensive does not automatically, or even usually, make it libelous, slanderous or a hate crime, without a whole lot more.
the answer to the OP might be hugely different if the involved parties are located in (examples):
california
Nairobi or
Nairobi and Caracas …
so, I guess we are missing a few relevant facts here to really help out … as one of the main Qs here is: what legislation were to apply (kenia’s, Venezuela’s, American)?
I believe the question the OP should be asking is whether Person A would prevail in a lawsuit filed agains Person C. You can sue anyone for just about anything.