UGC (User Generated Content) websites such as iHub (Google, Yahoo!, etc.) frequently
receive communications from individuals and companies claiming that false, inaccurate,
libelous and/or defamatory information has been posted about them on the website's
message boards. Often there is an accompanying threat to sue the website unless
objectionable content is removed and/or the website agrees to willingly turn over
the private user account information of the poster(s). If you have or are contemplating
sending iHub such a notice, demand or threat, please continue reading as this page
will provide you with information that may help you understand iHub’s policies,
your rights and the rights of posters. It is important to understand from the outset
that threats against iHub or its staff will not be tolerated and will not result
in the removal of content or disclosure of user account information.
Our policy regarding user content
iHub's message boards provide for the open exchange of both shared and opposing
views between interested participants. Posters are able to refute posts with which
disagree by submitting their own posts. Rebuttal and exchange allows readers to
evaluate opposing views and weigh their relevance.
It is iHub's policy that each reader has the privilege and duty to determine for
themselves the truthfulness and credibility of posts and posters. iHub users submit
over a million new posts each month. We do not have the personnel or resources to
investigate user posts or to make value judgments as to their accuracy or completeness.
If iHub were to remove content on the basis of its truthfulness it could be inferred
that, by not removing content, iHub is taking the position that the content is true.
We do not tread upon that slippery slope and defer to each reader to make their
In short, iHub is not an arbiter of truth and we do not remove or leave posts on
the basis of their alleged truthfulness or accuracy.
Before making threats of litigation against iHub it is important for one to understand
that it is the author of objectionable content that is potentially liable for such
content, not iHub. iHub is domiciled in the USA and the following are the prevailing
laws governing such matters:
The Communications Decency Act ("CDA") codified at 47 U.S.C § 230 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." This federal law broadly immunizes interactive computer services such
as iHub from liability and lawsuit arising from content posted by third-party
users. Courts have consistently held that the immunity extends to decisions and
actions taken to publish, delete or withdraw third-party content from publication
and encompasses claims for declaratory and injunctive relief. No state law supersedes
the federal immunity provided by the CDA. Every federal circuit and state appellate
court that has considered Section 230 has adopted this construction of the statute.
In short, the CDA ensures that operators of interactive websites are immune from
lawsuit and liability arising from third party content.1
The Securing the Protection of our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage
Act or SPEECH Act, codified at
28 U.S.C. §§ 4101-4105 bars all United States courts from enforcing
foreign defamation judgments that do not 1) provide as much protection for freedom
of speech as the First Amendment to the United States Constitution; 2) comport with
the due process requirements that are imposed on domestic courts by the United States
Constitution; or 3) afford the protections provided by The Communications Decency
Act. This federal law was unanimously enacted by Congress in 2010 to address libel tourism
which is the practice of foreign plaintiffs bringing defamation lawsuits against
U.S. entities in plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions. The statute also provides for
the U.S. courts to grant declaratory relief to the party bringing the action, as
well as legal costs incurred in doing so. In short, foreign defamation judgments
foreign judgments that do not conform with the CDA are barred from enforcement in the
If you believe there is an actionable legal claim against one or more posters then
it is incumbent upon a party with standing to seek remedy from the poster(s) in
a court of competent jurisdiction. The following links contain important information
in that regard:
InvestorsHub does not screen user posted content, nor do we determine the veracity
of such content for the very simple reason that we are not in a position to do so.
Assertions that certain posts are libelous, defamatory or fraudulent are matters
of opinion. In order to consider posts for removal on the basis of allegedly libelous
or defamatory content we require an enforceable order to that effect from a court
of competent jurisdiction.
Should you choose to seek injunctive or other relief please be reminded that any
such action should be brought against the author(s) of the offending content. Pursuant
to the provisions of the Communications Decency Act, codified at 47 U.S.C. § 230, no cause of action may be brought and no
liability may be imposed on message board operators for third party content. Please
be advised that should any such action be brought against InvestorsHub.com, Inc.,
we can and will file a motion for reimbursement of resulting legal expenses and
such additional sanctions as the court may allow.
Takedown requests in the USA: As mentioned above, Section 230 protects iHub
from being compelled to remove third-party content from its website. However, we
will take under advisement orders for declaratory relief (e.g., injunctions) resulting
from adversarial judicial proceedings issued by a court of competent jurisdiction.
Any such order and the underlying claim can be emailed to email@example.com.
Removal of third-party content, if any, will be at iHub's sole discretion.
Takedown requests in non-USA jurisdictions: InvestorsHub recognizes that
defamation law varies in jurisdictions outside of the United States. If a party outside of the USA believes
specific posts to be in violation of the law in their jurisdiction they can contact
us with a request for takedown at firstname.lastname@example.org. The request should
provide 1) the sender's standing to make a claim (only the allegedly defamed party
has standing); 2) the URL to each and every objectionable post; 3) the legal reason
for the takedown request; and 4) the country in which the post is alleged to be
in violation of law. iHub will review such requests for possible takedown
from publication in the specified (non-USA) jurisdiction.
Information regarding threats of litigation against iHub
iHub welcomes and encourages constructive input from our user community, however;
we do not welcome disruptive or non-constructive communications, or attacks on iHub
itself or our staff. Members who find themselves unable to refrain from attacking
iHub and/or its staff, including but not limited to 1) threats of reporting us to
[insert list of the usual "name dropped" agencies here], 2) threats of litigation,
3) predictions of our sudden demise, 4) accusations of criminality, conspiracy,
or any other alleged violation of law, or 5) vulgar or abusive communications, should
avail themselves of their prerogative to cease using the site immediately as we
have no interest in hearing it. Those unwilling or unable to respect these guidelines will
be asked to refrain from such conduct and, failing that, will be shown to the exit.
Nothing contained or omitted herein shall constitute or is intended to or shall
operate as an admission or as an election, waiver or relinquishment of or limitation
on any right, remedy or defense, at law or in equity, all of which are reserved.
For the Record - Past Litigation Involving Investors Hub
iHub has never lost a lawsuit in a court having personal jurisdiction over iHub2,
and has a long and successful history of defending actions improperly brought against
it, including where applicable, seeking recovery of its legal fees. The following links
provide summaries of litigation matters to which iHub has been a party: