The notes are a bit more detailed (p13 for Section 5). There seem to be lots of different overlapping defences of which you can choose to use one or more, that one is more protocol based and involved than the others (though some companies will like having a protocol to follow). It seems that the commentator doesn't have to consent to their contact information being released in order to keep their comment up.
I remember the guy saying that the best defence seems to be the EU "Information Society Service", and that's what will apply to most startups/businesses.
IANAL, but to be devil's advocate, it is slightly irresponsible to allow potentially malicious posters to post things on your website with no supervision, even if you are on holiday.
>It seems that the commentator doesn't have to consent to their contact information being released in order to keep their comment up.
So would my presumption clause work for keeping a comment up? I couldn't find anything on that approach.
>IANAL, but to be devil's advocate, it is slightly irresponsible to allow potentially malicious posters to post things on your website with no supervision, even if you are on holiday.
They do seem to take "ability to moderate" into consideration from a few case examples.
I honestly don't have a legal defense for this - I just see it as unreasonable. Which wouldn't hold up very well in court. :)
I remember the guy saying that the best defence seems to be the EU "Information Society Service", and that's what will apply to most startups/businesses.
IANAL, but to be devil's advocate, it is slightly irresponsible to allow potentially malicious posters to post things on your website with no supervision, even if you are on holiday.