Craigslist Sued By Those Who Misunderstand Internet Law

from the platform,-not-publisher dept

Wed, Feb 8th 2006 9:35am — Mike Masnick

How many of these types of lawsuits are we going to have before people realize that service/platform providers are not responsible for the content that people put into their service? This has been codified into law for ISPs and others, and yet the lawyers keep on suing. The latest is that Craigslist is being sued for discriminatory housing ads on its site. Craigslist isn't publishing the ads -- they're just the platform for individuals to publish their own ads. If the fair housing group wanted to target those responsible, it should sue the people who actually posted the ads, not Craigslist.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

57 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 8 Feb 2006 @ 10:14am

Don't hate the messenger...
I hate ignorance and prejudice as much as the next guy but simply ignoring and blocking out all the "bad stuff" isn't going to change how people think. The people that make these ads aren't going to magically like non-whites, non-gays, whatever just because they can't put that information in their ads.

No, what would happen is that some black guy sees the ad, goes to inquire about the housing and then gets rejected without being told a reason.

All we've done is wasted this preson's time just because racism hurts our sensitive wittle eyes.

Just get over it. Unless these prejudice people are operating an actual business, their beliefs are thier own problem, but if it is a business then sue the fucking business!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- law student, 8 Feb 2006 @ 11:32am
  
  Re: Don't hate the messenger...
  Im afriad a lot of these posters (craigslist employee specifically) are correct. Discriminatory housing ads are illegal, in newspapers, private adds an otherwise. People who know nothing about the law shouldnt speak as if they did. DO some research before making such statements.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 8 Feb 2006 @ 12:04pm
    
    Re: Don't hate the messenger...
    Another idiot who misses the point. I guess thats why you are still a "student".
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - monkey, 8 Feb 2006 @ 12:08pm
    
    welll....
    descriminatory statements are first amendment guaranteed in a public forum(craigslist), and are illegal for goods and services ad's in a subscription based public service organization(capitalist whakko newspapers). The forum administrator decides what the forum is about. the kkk is a legal organisation. naacp. legal.
    calls to action for illegal activity is a crime, but the individual who makes the call is responsible. The forum administrator could very well be held responsible for failing to Try to stop the crime. 1/640,000. i'd call that trying.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - law student, 8 Feb 2006 @ 4:05pm
      
      Re: welll....
      WRONG.
      
      Look up a few things before you make such statements. If you post kiddie porn or a request for such on your website, regardless of whether its your add or not, you posting it in public forum makes you liable. If there wasnt an issue, the casre would have been dismissed already.
      
      Thank goodness this country wasnt created by such people.
      
      PS - by the way, the KKK is classified as a TERRORIST ORGANIZATION by several federal government organizations, same as the aryan nations. Its not illegal to be one of them, but it is condition to strict scrutiny of its members actions.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- student, 8 Feb 2006 @ 12:45pm
  
  Re: Don't hate the messenger...
  [quote-I'm afraid you're missing the point. Yes, the ads are illegal, but the question is *who's responsibility* is it. And, in that, the law is clear. It's the person who posted the ad, and NOT Craigslits -- yet Craigslist is being sued.[/quote]
  
  Thats what the lawsuit is there t determine. Newspapers who post illegal adds are held to some degree of responsibility, ALONG WITH the poster. The add poster has a responsibility not to post illegal adds
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Mike (profile), 8 Feb 2006 @ 1:03pm
    
    Re: Don't hate the messenger...
    
    Thats what the lawsuit is there t determine. Newspapers who post illegal adds are held to some degree of responsibility, ALONG WITH the poster. The add poster has a responsibility not to post illegal adds
    
    It's different with newspapers who first approve the ads. The law has been clear in the past that an open forum where people can post whatever they want, the responsibility for content is with whoever posted the content -- not the forum provider.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 8 Feb 2006 @ 1:11pm
    
    Re: Don't hate the messenger...
    [quote]Thats what the lawsuit is there t determine. Newspapers who post illegal adds are held to some degree of responsibility, ALONG WITH the poster. The add poster has a responsibility not to post illegal adds[/quote]
    
    with newspaper ads, its different, because every ad is proofread and approved before posting. while everyone wants to compare craigslist to newspapers as if its a 1-to-1 correspondence is making a mistake. they are inherently different in how they work. craigslist cannot be held to the same standards as a newspaper.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 9 Feb 2006 @ 8:13pm
  
  Re: Don't hate the messenger...
  Everyone is racist, Whites, Blacks, Jews, Catholics.. its just how it is..
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - 1happynewyorker, 10 Feb 2006 @ 5:27am
    
    Re: Don't hate the messenger...
    I disagree with that statement. Everyone is not racist. I do believe that many people are prejudice against those who do not look and think like them.
    
    Moreover, just b/ many people are racist does not make it right. The face that many people smoke crack, does not make it right.
    
    I work with some intellignet people,and it never ceases to amaze me how many people are "prejudice" against other races/ethnicities.
    
    I was in the steam room with my boss the other day and she said, "I hate Jews". ?What? I said and she repeated the statement. I thought I was going to vomit. I was stunned. Now, this person is a card-carrying memeber of MENSA. Why she felt comfortable enough around me to say this, well I still baffled, since I am obviously Black.
    
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Zoinks!, 7 Mar 2006 @ 8:49am
      
      Re: Don't hate the messenger...
      hopefully everyone caught the IMPORTANT part of what was just written.....
      
      "was in the steam room with my boss the other day..."
      
      Now, while not so much so with my current supervisor (actually not at all) that would be a cool thing to be able to say (provided you weren't just there to pour water on the rocks.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ron, 8 Feb 2006 @ 10:17am

Offline
The site has been down for a number of days. I wonder if that had anything to do with it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Craigslist Employee, 8 Feb 2006 @ 10:56am
  
  Re: Offline
  I work for Craigslist.
  
  So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies.
  
  Some of you guys are very good at making it sound like you know what you are talking about.
  
  But trust me.... You don't.
  
  I think you just want to make yourself sound smart, when in reality you dont know what you are talking about.
  
  This is how bad info gets passed around.
  
  If you dont know about the topic....Dont make yourself sound like you do.
  
  Cuz some Techdirt readers believe anything they hear.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Jay, 8 Feb 2006 @ 11:00am
    
    Re: Conspiracy Theory
    I have it on good authority from my gut, that this lawsuit is actually being funded by the large newspaper conglomerates to try and get rid of online classified sites like craigslist which are hitting their revenues.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Imfbsbn, 8 Feb 2006 @ 2:37pm
      
      Re: Conspiracy Theory
      Per the Chicago Tribune " The Chicago Lawyers' Committee has 44 member firms whose lawyers do pro bono work for civil rights, particularly for housing and hate crime issues..."
      So it's a bunch of rich white guys sending a bunch of first year associates to go do some free legal work so they can claim how they help the cummunity.
      Grrrr.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Whateva, 8 Feb 2006 @ 11:03am
    
    Re: Re: Offline
    So educate us jackass. There were only two replies before you. By "most" of these replies, did you mean one of the two?? Neither one made any claim of knowing the innards of craigslist policy. Stop trying to make yourself sound smart. Your post had nothing informative in it.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 8 Feb 2006 @ 11:12am
      
      Re: Re: Offline
      Whateva, you got sucked into a comment cliche. That exact comment has been floating around everywhere online.
      
      ...And now I've been sucked into being the guy explaining it in this thread.
      -Lame
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - monkey, 8 Feb 2006 @ 11:05am
    
    Re: Offline
    what don't i know about the topic? you must be in the know about some craigslist issues. could you post some information about the suit? I hope craigslist is going to be ok. racism in personal ads is not allowed in most newspapers. perhaps the suit is an illustration of the need for craigslist to edit or remove ad postings for content. This would increase costs and force craigslist to capitalise on portions of it's ad base, but it could still be a good thing. if the list survives.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Landon, 8 Feb 2006 @ 11:08am
    
    Re: Cuz
    Mr. Craiglist Employee:
    Thank you for telling everyone that techdirt posters dont know what they are talking about. I am sure every single person, on every single article realizes that people do this. You are a genius. You are the true intellect of TechDirt. I wish everyone was like you.
    
    Ok, I am sure by now that you get that just puting people down does absolutely nothing, and you contributed nothing to this article. I am pretty sure that the point of this site is to share opinions, and you have not realized that. Of course, most people will try to disguise their opinion as a fact, as is human tendency. Now, why do you even read the postings if you have a problem with them? Was the color comics not enough entertainment for you?
    
    I would suggest that instead of telling everyone that they dont know anything, that you tell them the facts, and what is really happening. I am sure that it would be greatly appreciated.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - heavyw8t, 8 Feb 2006 @ 11:10am
    
    Re: Offline
    This EXACT post was on Fark earlier today. This EXACT wording. Scolding people who "don't know what they are talking about".
    
    Yo work for Craig's List like I do, jerk.
    
    More like Schindler's List.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - heavyw8t, 8 Feb 2006 @ 11:15am
    
    Here is the post from Fark.
    2006-02-08 01:46:49 AM the oob
    
    I'm married to a fourteen year old.
    
    So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies.
    
    Some of you guys are very good at making it sound like you know what you are talking about.
    
    But trust me.... You don't.
    
    I think you just want to make yourself sound smart, when in reality you dont know what you are talking about.
    
    This is how bad info gets passed around.
    
    If you dont know about the topic....Dont make yourself sound like you do.
    
    Cuz some Farkers believe anything they hear.
    
    Note the same misspelling/typo on the word "don't". 3 times. And the use of "cuz" rather than "because". Not only a dork, but an illiterate dork as well.
    
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 8 Feb 2006 @ 2:22pm
      
      Re: Here is the post from Fark.
      Don't you people get it? That's a recurring joke from Fark. Ugh.
      
      You Have Been Trolled. You Have Lost.
      
      And here I thought techdirt readers were in the bigger sandbox.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Stan, 8 Feb 2006 @ 3:46pm
    
    Re: Offline
    "I work for Craigslist."
    
    Prove it.
    
    Additionally, if you do work for Craigslist (which is doubtful, it's more likely you're a troll trying to stir the shitpot), are you legally authorized to speak for the company?
    
    That's what I thought. Take a hike, bud.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Michael Vilain, 9 Feb 2006 @ 12:41am
      
      Re: Craig's List worker
      I'm sure a scan of Craig's List server logs will show what IP the entry was posted from. From there, a subpeona of the ISP will get the name and address of the actual poster.
      
      If they _are_ a Craig's List employee, they probably won't be for long.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - thecaptain, 9 Feb 2006 @ 5:20am
    
    Re: Offline
    Ahhhh sheesh, the fark moron is here.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - 11B3VW8, 9 Feb 2006 @ 7:33am
    
    Re: Offline
    Well well..you're the same jackass that was posting to slashdot yesterday regarding the removal of the NASA Director. Same verbage..only yesterday you worked for NASA..do us all a favor..bend over, put your head in your ass and jump..
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 9 Feb 2006 @ 1:40pm
      
      Re: Offline
      haha, you're the jackass...
      
      He isn't the same guy. There are thousands of people posting this cliche around the Net right now.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Jeff, 26 Mar 2006 @ 10:44am
    
    Re: Re: Offline
    I saw your post online from February. Do you still work for CL? Do you believe in true love? Ever had your heart broken to pieces?
    I need help with something, perhaps you can assist.
    Drop me a line to let me know you got this and we can proceed from there.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dam, 8 Feb 2006 @ 11:09am

It's the law
Discrimination in ads has been prohibited for many years, and the fact that these appear in an electronic format instead of paper shouldn't matter. It does at this point, because no law specifically addresses the electronic format.

Any ruling that comes out of these lawsuits has the potential for being a landmark case.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike (profile), 8 Feb 2006 @ 11:17am
  
  Re: It's the law
  Discrimination in ads has been prohibited for many years, and the fact that these appear in an electronic format instead of paper shouldn't matter. It does at this point, because no law specifically addresses the electronic format.
  
  I'm afraid you're missing the point. Yes, the ads are illegal, but the question is *who's responsibility* is it. And, in that, the law is clear. It's the person who posted the ad, and NOT Craigslits -- yet Craigslist is being sued.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 8 Feb 2006 @ 2:19pm
    
    Re: It's the law
    make that "whose" please
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Robert, 8 Feb 2006 @ 3:54pm
    
    Re: It's the law
    "And, in that, the law is clear."
    
    Actually, the law is not clear.. yet. Internet law is still in its infancy in most places. For example, in many states there still aren't even any consumer protection laws against misleading advertising on the internet, as there are for printed ads, yet the internet has already seen over 10 years of public use in this regard.
    
    In a printed medium, it is normally the publisher or editor who controls the content. On Craigslist, it is the user. The law will probably move toward that end, eventually. In the meantime, pressure will mount on Craigslist to take responsibility until the law catches up.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jay, 8 Feb 2006 @ 11:11am

helps both sides.
ya know, if someone's willing to state up front: "I don't like darkie" or "towelheads stay away" or "must love JESUS" then it's also a service to those not wanting to room with a racist or bible thumper. I don't see what the big deal is...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Landon, 8 Feb 2006 @ 11:12am

Cuz
Oh, and just because you work for Craiglist doesnt mean you know anything. You can try to prove your point the other way, but I wont believe it. Just think about it this way, your point would be as convincing to me as a 15 year old McDonalds employee trying to explain to me that they had the insde scoop behind the hot coffee spill lawsuit
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
monkey, 8 Feb 2006 @ 11:14am

internet gangs.
it looks like the internet is going to be socially cleansed for innappropriate content by the capitalist press. hmm. sounds like an undertaking where lots of lawyers make lots of money and everyone else suffers.
craigslist has been accused of having approx 100 racially biased housing ad's in eight months, while there are 8M ad's per month running. I think ad hoc self policing is working pretty damned efficiently.
1/640,000th of craigslist ad's contain racial bias?
blood in the water for greedy newspaper accountants.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
phranq da tank, 8 Feb 2006 @ 12:08pm

stoopid hoomans
humans suck! why can't they be like us Orcs... we don't go suing people... we just punch their kittens! PUNCH KITTENS FTW!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- monkey, 8 Feb 2006 @ 12:10pm
  
  Re: stoopid hoomans
  the creamer must be sour today.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - phranq da tank, 8 Feb 2006 @ 3:38pm
    
    Re: stoopid hoomans
    You want your kittens punched? huh? you looking to have some kittens damaged? huh, monkey?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Denfro Licious, 8 Feb 2006 @ 12:13pm

Hmmm
Well that law seems strange. Doesn't it go against freedom of speech? A newspaper or a website, such as craigslist in this case, is simply the vehicle used to transport the writer's opinion. This would suggest that forums and blogs are a part of that jurisdiction. Why don't they go sue MySpace and Blogger?

I'm certainly against discrimination but the newspaper or websites should not be the ones being sued. Discrimination is an opinion and it is ever so difficult to take action on an online source. Do you notice how much more political the internet is becoming?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
jdw242, 8 Feb 2006 @ 2:34pm

gawd
the crap above is EXACTLY why I left Slashdot.

Don't you trolls have anything better to do than stand on your mountain top and yell over everyone else?

Give us a break.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
law student, 8 Feb 2006 @ 4:08pm

No Subject Given
Sorryt o burst all your bubbles, but the LAW says that the webmaster/newspaper/magazine editor all hold some responsibility to what exists on their sites, particularly when the site proports to be a lever of interstate commerce (which craigslist falls under).

This is america, we dont make up the law as we go, we abide by it. Stick to your personal opinions and dont make liars of yourselves by proporting your opinions as set law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike (profile), 8 Feb 2006 @ 4:11pm
  
  Re: No Subject Given
  Sorryt o burst all your bubbles, but the LAW says that the webmaster/newspaper/magazine editor all hold some responsibility to what exists on their sites, particularly when the site proports to be a lever of interstate commerce (which craigslist falls under).
  
  Er... no. The courts have been pretty consistent in saying that, in an open forum, the posted content is the responsibility of the posting parties, and not the forum owner. This is also codified into the DMCA in order to protect ISPs from being held liable for things their users do.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Landon, 8 Feb 2006 @ 4:41pm
    
    Re: No Subject Given
    Is anyone here familiar with lawyers? I know a little bit about them. I mean, I at least know enough about them to know that they usually dot the i's, and cross the t's. That being said, its America, not america. Also, you should use correct punctuation, grammer, spellings, and so forth. Also, cite your sources.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Mark C, 8 Feb 2006 @ 10:04pm
    
    Re: No Subject Given
    I'm going to have to agree with Mike on this one. This is a annonymous posting site where you can post whatever you please. Even the email addresses are hidden! Having a huge forum (8+million posts) like craigslist is a huge undertaking, for one. Expecting anybody to try and moderate that (which they do try to) is incredible. I, for one, have never posted on craigslist but I surfed on over to their website to see if I could post something. Within 30 seconds I went through the pages and could've posted my ad for whatever but it would've been fake anyway.
    
    The point is that this is a free forum. Emphasis on the word free in the sense of money. Craigslist doesn't charge to put your ad up on the site while newspapers/magazines actually do thereby they are indeed more responsible for their content than a website.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
SarasotaBob, 9 Feb 2006 @ 5:32am

the crap above is EXACTLY why I left Slashdot.
*points and laughs*

Fark makes you smarter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Craigslist Employee's Employee, 30 Apr 2006 @ 9:37am

I work for...
I work for Craigslist Employee.

So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies.

Some of you guys are very good at making it sound like you know what you are talking about.

But trust me.... You don't.

I think you just want to make yourself sound smart, when in reality you dont know what you are talking about.

This is how bad info gets passed around.

If you dont know about the topic....Dont make yourself sound like you do.

Cuz some Techdirt readers believe anything they hear
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Craigslist's Employee's Employee's Intern, 12 Jul 2006 @ 10:14am

I work for Craigslist's Employee's Employee.

So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies.

Some of you guys are very good at making it sound like you know what you are talking about.

But trust me.... You don't.

I think you just want to make yourself sound smart, when in reality you dont know what you are talking about.

This is how bad info gets passed around.

If you dont know about the topic....Dont make yourself sound like you do.

Cuz some Techdirt readers believe anything they hear
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
darrylzen@verizon.net, 24 Sep 2006 @ 3:53am

Craigslist andsuits against craigslist
Freedom of speech is different than promoting something illegal. IF the ad is illegal or the content is illegal (I've not read the ads mentioned), then Freedom of speech is out the window and irrelevant. First, if there is an illegal ad or illegal contect, craigslist shouldn't post it and should monitor the ads , like any responsible company would do , and STOP the questionable ads or be held liable for helping the promotion of whatever the ad is selling. CRAIGLIST is not immune to the law. (For example, if Macys or Sears, or some large company began posting ads advertising for prostitutes , then all of these companies would be liable and they would be investigated by the police department and the government. (I'm not comparing the two issues, but trying to make a very obvious point here) . Why shouldn't craigslist be held responsible for what they print? THey should indeed. So, for example if craigslist has an advertisement selling guns to four year old children, that's illegal --so yes, craigslist is the messenger --and in this case and in all illegal cases, YES hold the messenger responsible for all the content of its' website. If craigslist claims they can't monitor the contents, then craigslist should go out of business IF the problem is posting illegal things. If you reply to this post, kindly do so in a civil manner without any name-calling. That kind of response -a civil one - will be appreciated. I'm not against craiglist. I like the site and feel that it's very helpful to some people. BUt just because a site is helpful to some people, that doesn't give it a special privilege to post or promote things that are illegal. Thanks for listening.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Just Me, 24 Mar 2007 @ 1:37am
  
  Re: Craigslist andsuits against craigslist
  Your point makes sense morally . . . but there's points here that you just simply don't know exist. If you did, you would save your breath because you would know that is was being wasted, not only your breath, but your time. Of course everyone knows whats going on including the owners of such sites. But the owners aren't going to publicly explain it to you, they're going to let you find out on your own. Trying to explain what can not be changed only to get you all twisted up is bad publicity brought on for no reason at all. The world as a whole changes and people complain about it all the time, but it just keeps on doing the inevitable. Sorry . . . back to the point that you don't know about. It has to do with the Internet. If you want to do something illegal and then disappear, it's as easy as turning off you computer and then logging back on, like morphing from a dirt field in the middle of Texas to an island in the middle of the ocean. Do you have any idea how many sites there are where people advertise erotic services. The sites are legal because if you truly could just eliminate prostitution, they would just all become strippers, hence Erotic Services and that's what the sites claim they are there for. There's plenty marketing mediums for the prostitutes to market on right now, shut down ER on CL and TheNewList.com will be up that very minute. You can holler all you want, it's simply like trying to stop a tsunami. Seriously evaluate the whole scenario, trains of thought and opinions that once applied in a later time, just don't in this time. Seriously, shut down ER on CL and I could have a site up instantly that sold Q-Tips, include an Erotic Services section (for strippers of course) spread the word just a little and I'd be instantly rich from selling Q-Tips. Creating a law to monitor the ER section is a waste of judicial time too and that's why they don't do it. Anyone who offered a term like Girl Friend Experience would simple become Pretty House Cleaner. All of this would happen in a blink . . . understand? Believe me? It's the bottom line truth and I'm pretty sure everybody wants to understand that while participating in any discussion. I would prefer all things richeous in the world, but getting heated over this is like getting pissed that you can't leap tall buildings in a single bound ;) CL isn't the only medium, there's been tons of them since the Internet became popular enough. You're just now hearing about it is all. Damn I'm rambling . . . sorry ;)
  Oh and to answer the first question . . . people sue entities like CL for cases they know they can't win for instant publicity. File lawsuit and just like real magic, you're Big News associated with the headline "Craigslist Sued" He doesn't care that he's going to lose, losing won't hurt his rep in this rare occasion. It's the same reason reporters pretend to be impartial, so people will watch them on the news too. Sometimes you find yourself caught up "in" the movie . . take a seat outside the tv/box . . it's a larger perspective from wich to be a critic ;)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
anon, 14 Jan 2007 @ 6:29am

fake craigslist ads
come on.. how many of us have great fun posting free fake giveaway ads and having the responders go to a non existant address and watch the traffic jams.

last free late model car had over 550 people respond and the traffic jam was so great it was on the local tv news

lots of fun to be had for all
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Feb 2007 @ 6:36pm

It's back up
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
underssoXxo, 19 Oct 2007 @ 3:10pm

Discriminatory ads on craigslist welcome by craigs
craigslist has become a joke. a few times when i have seen an ad that was extremely discriminatory, i contacted craiglist. on one, a person named clint got back to me and asked for specific info. i got back to him with it. but a week later, the ad still stood. this is what the ad said: "Nanny wanted. Pakistanis, Polish, and Afganis need only apply. Not interested in any other ethnicities."
Is this blatant discrimination or what? Craigslist was contacted, clearly got the message, and looked away.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Linda, 15 Dec 2007 @ 8:20pm

Craigslist harrasess an elderly lady with cancer.
These idiots who work for craigslist calling them selves "customer support" should be renamed customer harassers."
They are extremely rude. My mother who has cancer tried to post a support page for peple to contact her and they emailed her 13 emails with abusive and harassing threats.

What is wrong with craigslist. Wy do people not stop this horrible platform?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don Dakaz, 21 Oct 2008 @ 6:37pm

F..CK CRAIGSLIST AND HIS EMPLOYERS
#1 Kids selling them selfs on craigslsit
#2 People got Killed over car sale tru craigslsit
#3 People loosing homes because craigslsit hosting Scam ads

SHOT DOWN CRAIGSLIST !!!!!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
dr, 12 Apr 2010 @ 10:31am

I couldn't disagree more. People can hide behind anonymity on Craigslist or set up fake accounts. Craigslist has a responsibility to monitor what people are posting. This is the problem with the Internet, there's no credibility. Real journalism (as opposed to Blogging) is filtered through editors who fact check. I believe Craigslist should absolutely be sued for allowing hatred and racism to be posted publicly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Internet Lawyer, 17 Feb 2013 @ 11:47pm

Internet Lawyer
I am a lawyer.

First, I should mention a couple of things.. I didn't read all of this thread, so I'm not sure if this has already been said. Second, I am from a different jurisdiction. A different country even (Canada), but a lot of the same rules apply.

Substitutional service is given in situations where the person being served is missing, evading service, or whose location isn't known to anybody.

If you say they served you personally, that should be the end of it. The case begins, and they don't get to win by default anymore (default judgment).

But then you say they served you substitutionally via a friend? So what you need to do is draw up an affidavit for your friend to swear saying that your friend was never served and is not aware of any documents in his possession that were meant for you.

That'll be a good start.

Although this will probably get buried in the bottom somewhere.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
victor, 6 Dec 2019 @ 1:50pm

fraud on craigslist by craigslist employees
can cl be sued if they allow there employees to post the scam ads and theses employees wont flag there own scam ads
[ link to this | view in chronology ]