Opinion Website Rules?
 

I've decided to create my own review/opinion website (just because I'm bored). And was wondering if there's any rules that I have to follow (like, can't talk bad about the President, etc...)

I know this is probably WAY to vague.

Re: Opinion Website Rules?
 

(standard IANAL warning)

Opinions? Just watch out for libel and slander.

And if you represent anyone (read: your team, your job, etc.), you may want to put a disclaimer in.

Re: Opinion Website Rules?
 

Libel?

Thanks also for the tips/warnings

I had a feeling about the rep. one though :)

Re: Opinion Website Rules?
 

Wikipedia on Libel

Libel is actually what you need to be worried about--it's defamation of character in a written form. Slander is just the spoken form.

Re: Opinion Website Rules?
 

You will want to have a Legal Notice and Acceptable Use Policy for your site. If you have one of these then I believe you are pretty protected from libel. To be extra safe, you may want to have your site set up so that everyone who joins has to acknowledge they have read that page.

Here's an example AUP This is a good start, but this AUP is for a site that is completely unmoderated so you should check out the AUP pages for some moderated sites as well, unless you are planning on having a unmoderated site.

Heidi

Re: Opinion Website Rules?
 

Thanks :)

Thing is, it's more of a one-man thing (aka: only my opinions) for now, and I'm really not going to have a forum (I'm doing this on a free server [Brinkster]).

But, basically what you are saying is to have some sort of thing saying"this site will contain content you may not agree with, or etc...; if you do not agree to these rules, then please leave"?

Re: Opinion Website Rules?
 

Heh, I guess I like forums so much I think all sites are going to be forums.

Well, always have a disclaimer that it is your opinion, and really be careful that what you state is factual.

Heidi

Re: Opinion Website Rules?
 

Realistically, that's clumsier than a normal splash page. I'd suggest linking to your legal policy page instead--for instance, put a small link at the bottom of every page, or in the navigation pane, if you have one.

Re: Opinion Website Rules?
 

What I was planning on doing is putting it in a little menu of it's own on the right side of the page (like my poetry page [link in sig]). I think a link to the page might do a lot better though.

Re: Opinion Website Rules?
 

Below is a link to my site, where it has my legal info so far:

Read my T.o.S.

I know it's probably bad...but hey.

What do ya'll think I should/could/might want to do to improve it.

Re: Opinion Website Rules?
 

You definitley do not need an intro page with a TOS on it. There are many reasons why you don't have to worry about legal action, but let me just give you a few.

1. Libel does not really cover defamatory opinions, just false statements. The 1st ammendment guarantees your right to state your opinions, just not to lie about someone else. (In fact, you have to intentionally lie to be guilty of libel, see the Wikipedia page)
2. There are literally millions of blogs and personal websites full of personal opinions with no such disclaimers (try http://maddox.xmission.com)
3. Your page is probably going to be way too low traffic for it to be worth anyone's time to bother with you.

If it ever does reach any appreciable size, and you are still worried, follow the trend of other large websites with disclaimers and put a small link at the bottom to a "legal" page.

Re: Opinion Website Rules?
 

1. So, basically, all I got to do is state factual opinions (or ways to justify my opinions)?

2. I'm aware of Maddox :) One of my favorite sites for this stuff.

3. I put a lot of thought into this one :)


I think what I'll do is just take it down from the front page, and put it into the legal page (just for the heck of it really).


Thanks for your response.

Re: Opinion Website Rules?
 

Your welcome. Sure, keep it. Since you already have it written, no sense in getting rid of it.

Interestingly enough, a supreme court ruling set a precedent by requiring libel to not just be fictitious, but intentionally fictitious (or so Wikipedia tells us). It might be hard for Dan Rather to pretend that he, or his sources were not intentionally fictitious, but for a small website run by Joe Shmoe (in the eyes of the law) with no real reputation or expected quality, I'm sure it's very easy to argue that any fictitious statement was not intended.