Loading...

What are "yelp ducks"? - Hallo friend WELCOME TO AMERICA, In the article you read this time with the title What are "yelp ducks"?, we have prepared well for this article you read and download the information therein. hopefully fill posts Article AMERICA, Article CULTURAL, Article ECONOMIC, Article POLITICAL, Article SECURITY, Article SOCCER, Article SOCIAL, we write this you can understand. Well, happy reading.

Title : What are "yelp ducks"?
link : What are "yelp ducks"?

What are "yelp ducks"?

I'm trying to read this headline: "Yelp Ducks Court Order to Remove Defamatory Posts."

So many words that could be either nouns or verbs: yelp, ducks, court, order, posts.

The only words that aren't a noun/verb are to, remove, and defamatory. (Remove can be a noun, but not with to in front of it.)

That headline had me picturing a type of annoying duck that was wooing... order???

As we've discussed before, Language Log calls this problem with compressed words in headlines a  "crash blossom" (because there was once a headline, "Violinist Linked to JAL Crash Blossoms").

Anyway, the story, from Courthouse News Serivce, is about a duck... I mean, a Bird — Ava Bird — who had a default judgment entered against her over a 1-star review posted on the website Yelp. The plaintiff — another great name — Dawn Hassell — took the judgment to Yelp, but Yelp wasn't a party to the lawsuit, and the California Supreme Court said the judgment couldn't be enforced against Yelp:

But writing for the 4-3 state high court on Monday, Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye said the lower courts read the [federal] Communications Decency Act too narrowly in rejecting Yelp’s claim of immunity.

“Had plaintiffs’ claims for defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and false light been alleged directly against Yelp, these theories would be readily understood as treating Yelp as the ‘publisher or speaker’ of the challenged reviews,” Cantil-Sakauye wrote in the 33-page opinion. “In this case, however, Yelp is inherently being treated as the publisher of the challenged reviews, and it has not engaged in conduct that would take it outside section 230’s purview in connection with the removal order.”

Yelp's statement:

“Of course, Yelp has no interest in publishing defamation, which is not helpful to consumers, and our terms of service prohibit the posting of defamatory content. But defamation is more than just a label, and so Yelp studies court orders to ensure they are valid and actually make a showing that defamation has occurred, before Yelp removes reviewer content.”

I like Yelp's position and, of course, I love the Communications Decency Act and don't want to see it eroded by judges. Without it, I couldn't have a comments section on this blog.

I'm trying to read this headline: "Yelp Ducks Court Order to Remove Defamatory Posts."

So many words that could be either nouns or verbs: yelp, ducks, court, order, posts.

The only words that aren't a noun/verb are to, remove, and defamatory. (Remove can be a noun, but not with to in front of it.)

That headline had me picturing a type of annoying duck that was wooing... order???

As we've discussed before, Language Log calls this problem with compressed words in headlines a  "crash blossom" (because there was once a headline, "Violinist Linked to JAL Crash Blossoms").

Anyway, the story, from Courthouse News Serivce, is about a duck... I mean, a Bird — Ava Bird — who had a default judgment entered against her over a 1-star review posted on the website Yelp. The plaintiff — another great name — Dawn Hassell — took the judgment to Yelp, but Yelp wasn't a party to the lawsuit, and the California Supreme Court said the judgment couldn't be enforced against Yelp:

But writing for the 4-3 state high court on Monday, Chief Justice Tani

Loading...

Cantil-Sakauye said the lower courts read the [federal] Communications Decency Act too narrowly in rejecting Yelp’s claim of immunity.

“Had plaintiffs’ claims for defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and false light been alleged directly against Yelp, these theories would be readily understood as treating Yelp as the ‘publisher or speaker’ of the challenged reviews,” Cantil-Sakauye wrote in the 33-page opinion. “In this case, however, Yelp is inherently being treated as the publisher of the challenged reviews, and it has not engaged in conduct that would take it outside section 230’s purview in connection with the removal order.” Yelp's statement:

“Of course, Yelp has no interest in publishing defamation, which is not helpful to consumers, and our terms of service prohibit the posting of defamatory content. But defamation is more than just a label, and so Yelp studies court orders to ensure they are valid and actually make a showing that defamation has occurred, before Yelp removes reviewer content.”

I like Yelp's position and, of course, I love the Communications Decency Act and don't want to see it eroded by judges. Without it, I couldn't have a comments section on this blog.

Thus articles What are "yelp ducks"?

that is all articles What are "yelp ducks"? This time, hopefully can provide benefits to all of you. Okay, see you in another article posting.

You now read the article What are "yelp ducks"? with the link address https://welcometoamerican.blogspot.com/2018/07/what-are-yelp-ducks.html

Tweet

Subscribe to receive free email updates: