Sometimes following the online legal scene is like reading an Etch A Sketch. Here’s the latest batch:
—Web Sites Not Liable for Posts by Others: Reversing an appellate court decision, the California Supreme Court has ruled that sites are not liable for libel in third-party posts. A women’s health advocate posted a scathing e-mail by another person on two newsgroups; two doctors identified in the e-mails sued for libel, claiming she knew the material was false and defamatory. Associate Justice Carol A. Corrigan: “The prospect of blanket immunity for those who intentionally redistribute defamatory statements on the Internet has disturbing implications. Nevertheless ... statutory immunity serves to protect online freedom of expression and to encourage self-regulation, as Congress intended.” No decision yet on an appeal.

—Judge to rule on landmark Internet porn law: A U.S. law meant to shield children from online pornography could be struck down after a four-week trial in Philadelphia ... the ACLU and other opponents say the Child Online Protection Act of 1998 is so poorly written that it is too restrictive for adults. Their argument: filtering is better. The government says that isn’t good enough. This law has never been implemented and was sent back by the U.S. Supreme Court to the lower court for a full trial. We’ll see what this judge says.

—China court rules in favor of Baidu in MP3 download suit - report:  The China Business News is reporting that a Beijing court ruled in favor of Baidu in a copyright suit by seven global music companies. Universal, Sony BMG, EMI, etc. were suing over Baidu’s MP3 search technology providing links to illegal downloads. BBC: This overturns an earlier ruling. “If the music companies had won, the whole search engine sector would have ground to a halt,” Xinhua news agency quoted a Baidu spokesman as saying.” The report has the music labels appealing.