Why Ron Livingston didn't sue Wikipedia

By Eriq Gardner

Actor Ron Livingston and his lawyer may be in the process of showing others how to fight anonymous Internet pranksters.

On Friday, the actor best known for "Office Space" filed this lawsuit in Los Angeles Superior Court. At issue is an anonymous individual who keeps changing Livingston's Wikipedia profile and creating Facebook pages to create the appearance he's in a gay relationship. Livingston is alleging that his unidentified troublemaker committed "despicable acts," including libel, invasion of privacy, and misappropriation of name and likeness.

One might wonder why Livingston isn't suing Wikipedia. 

Here's the problem: Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act gives broad protections to web hosts on libel claims by stating, "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."

We figure that Livingston's lawyers at Santa Monica's Kinsella Weitzman firm realize that battling Wikipedia directly wouldn't be the best strategy.

We're guessing that Livingston will next attempt to subpoena Wikipedia and Facebook for the identification of the user, followed by a request for an injunction against the user from making further updates. 

This might be the best legal recourse available for Livingston — and anybody targeted by anonymous defamation on the web. Unfortunately, the litigation is going to come at a price. The litigation is now part of Livingston's official legacy—and is, of course, fair game for his Wikipedia page.

Comments

[David Gerard]

Speaking as a Wikipedia volunteer who deals with this sort of problem a bit - we do actually not want libelous rubbish in the encyclopedia, and work hard to keep it out when alerted (and try to be proactive). Not from fear of legal action, but because it's the wrong thing to let happen.

If anyone has problems with libelous rubbish being in their article, the first thing to do is email info@wikimedia.org - it'll get passed to an experienced volunteer who will look into it quickly.

We really seriously don't want abusive rubbish in the encyclopedia, and work hard to keep it out.

[J. Somey]

Mr. Gerard's point is well-taken, except for his use of the word "we." Wikipedia is a collection of individuals who are often at odds with each other, and not all of them want to keep rubbish out of the encyclopedia - many are fighting tooth and nail to keep it in, at all costs. The result is more like World of Warcraft than an actual encyclopedia.

In any event, Wikipedia administrators were alerted to the problems with the Livingston article when it first started many months ago, but failed to apply any preventative measures whatsoever, apparently preferring to sit back and "watch the fun." Many (if not most) of them were hoodwinked by the perpetrator's fake websites and blogs, just as many in the media are being hoodwinked right now - there is, in fact, no such person as "Lee Dennison." He's a complete fiction.

Details are here:
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=27677

In addition to Livingston, this same person tried to do the same thing with other celebrities, and also used some of the same false identities on other websites, such as amazon.co.uk. Unfortunately, the law has yet to catch up with the fact that people like this exist, and that the interactive web, led by Wikipedia, facilitates their malicious fantasies.