The moderators are criminally and civil liable for whatever appears on the list,
under all of Indian, UK, and US laws. The position is identical to that of an
editor & publisher. It is not a defence that it is not possible to monitor the
messages in real time or in a short period of time after publication.

In 1992-93, the Supreme Court of India sentenced the editors & publishers of a
Rajasthan daily to jail for a few days for publishing an article by an outside
columnist critical of the lower judiciary in Rajasthan. Even though the editor
was on leave for three months, and was abroad at that time, he was held liable
even though the paper published an apology. He was sent to jail along with the
publishers.

See the famous Playboy vs Frena case in USA where the operator of a discussion
list was held liable even though he removed the offending material as soon as it
was brought to his notice. The US courts held that it was not a defence, but
only a mitigating circumstance, that it was difficult for him to monitor
hundreds of postings.

The situation is same for copyright violations, defamation, libel, etc. since
they are all crimes of absolute strict liability where mens rea or even lack of
knowledge is not a defence.  The Privy Council had ruled in a case in 1930 on
copyright violation: "Innocence is no defence to a charge of infringement. The
defendant is liable even if he authorized the infringement innocently or in good
faith. A defendant pleading that he had no reasonable ground for suspecting
infringment must prove it affirmatively." This Privy Council ruling will be
applicable in all Commonwealth common law countries.

Ravi Visvesvaraya Prasad p@...    r@...
Tel: {91 } 99 90 265 822, 098 118 36 331





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]