So just how does Twitter (and most of the Internet) get away with this? Why, the Communications Decency Act of 1996, of course! Lauded as a great protector of freedom of expression, Section 230 of this piece of legislation, states: "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.” In other words, websites hosting third-party content are not held legally responsible for the user created content (though it should be noted there are exceptions regarding intellectual property and criminal claims). This is how sites like Yelp and YouTube are able to function. The more you know.

So let's dig into the particulars of this specific case:

The Accusation:

Love’s former attorney, Rhonda Holmes, who was hired by Love to tackle a fraud case against the executors of her late husband’s estate, accused Love of defamation of character, after reading the following tweet sent from Courtney’s since suspended @CourtneyLoveUK account in June 2010:

“@noozjunkie I was f***ing devastated when Rhonda J Holmes Esq of san diego was bought off @fairnewsspears perhaps you can quote.”

The Defense:

At first, Courtney tried to play dumb claiming she was not “good” at computers and didn’t understand that her tweet was public and not just sent to the two people tagged therein. She also claimed that since her tweet was merely an “opinion,” it should not be treated as defamation (this seems tough to argue as the tweet seemed to be phrased as a statement of fact). When the judge wouldn’t buy it, Love’s defense team took another approach. They now argue that since the Internet is like the Wild West of the printed word, drenched in exaggeration, misrepresentations, rumors, opinions, and cat memes, Love’s off-the-cuff comments should simply be taken in stride.

The Issue:

The question now becomes: should Twitter (or the Internet at large) reshape the way our courts view defamation? Essentially, does the length of the writing -- 140 characters vs. an article or an essay -- affect its ability to contain libel? And how do we move forward while protecting both freedom of expression and the freedom to not have life-wrecking lies spread about you around the world wide web?

We don't know the answers to these questions yet, but chances are we could be in for some rule changes in the near future. For now though, just sit back and watch it all unfold, and remember, tweet responsibly.

Courtney LoveCourtney Love

What You Tweet Could Come Back to Haunt You. Just Ask Courtney Love