How do you find a compromise between preserving free speech and protecting students from becoming victims of libelous and defamatory comments?
That is the question raised by Juicycampus.com-, a Web site launched last October on seven college campuses that serves as a forum for students to post campus gossip anonymously.
Now with more than 50 registered campuses, Juicy Campus has proven to be controversial, raising concerns among legal experts and students alike.
The site has drawn comparisons to AutoAdmit, a forum for law students that is facing a defamation lawsuit over posts made by anonymous users.
But Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act - which regulates obscenity online - provides immunity to sites like Juicy Campus if "the site operator does not get involved with moderating, editing and otherwise processing the content," Rob Frieden, a professor of telecommunications and law at Penn State, wrote in an e-mail.
Juicy Campus policy is to "only remove posts on rare occasions," said founder Matt Ivester, who added that it is not the Web site's place to judge the validity of posts.
"We rely on our users to create the community that they want to create and put posts out there that comply with our terms and conditions," he said. Those conditions say users cannot post copyrighted material or untrue defamatory statements.
Problems arise when people who are defamed want to obtain the name of the person who posted about them, said Clay Calvert, a Penn State professor of first amendment studies and co-director of the Pennsylvania Center for the First Amendment.
"Courts have said that it is possible to compel that," Calvert added.
In the AutoAdmit case, a federal judge recently granted two Yale University law students' requests to subpoena Internet service providers to identify users who posted defamatory comments.
Ivester said he wanted Juicy Campus users to be able to post anonymously so they would not have to worry about repercussions from professors or administrators about their posts.
But those posts can cause problems for the targeted students.
"Part of what makes Juicy Campus troubling is that the power is taken out of the hands of the individual," said Paul Pennelli, senior director at ReputationDefender, a firm that manages clients' online reputations.
Students at Penn recognize the appeal of the gossip site but are also wary of its faults.
College freshman Gabby Nourafchan admitted she enjoyed the site - until someone wrote a negative post about her.
"We can't wait until everyone is on it to admit that it's bad," she said, adding that she thinks the site is "just an outlet for females to get out their jealously and their rage."
In response to student complaints about the Web site, the student government at Pepperdine University in Malibu, Calif. recently voted in favor of asking its administration to ban the site from the campus network.
Penn Undergraduate Assembly chairman and College senior Jason Karsh said he does not consider regulating Web sites an appropriate role for the student government.
Having jurisdiction over what sites students visit "would be trying to limit freedom of speech," Karsh said.
