In the Californian case, several of the allegedly defamatory statements were found to be “expressions of subjective judgement” rather than statements of fact. However, the judge conceded that one of the statements may have been defamatory in nature. It had been written by someone else, so Rosenthal was only responsible for re-posting it on the internet newsgroup. This gave her immunity from a defamation action under US federal laws that state that a person who uses an interactive computer service is not treated as the publisher of a statement by a third party.
Lee Tien, Senior Staff Attorney for the internet civil liberties organisation the Electronic Frontier Foundation said:
“... Congress tried to protect free speech on the internet from chilling threats of costly litigation. This decision will help achieve that goal and marks a solid victory for free expression. Internet speech would be stifled if individuals could be found liable for the defamatory statements of others."