Author 
Can schools be held accountable for what students do?  Well, to answer this let me ask another question - If someone uses the telephone to harass you, is the telephone company responsible? No, I don't think so.  However, if the telephone company is made aware of the situation and they do nothing about it then the telephone company may be partly to blame.  I think that the schools role in student web pages will be very similar.  

Everyone is entitled to free speech.  Of course, this also means that individuals must be willing to accept the responsiblity that goes with it.  Students need to be held accountable when they have done something wrong.  And, of course, schools need to do their best to prevent these situations since it's a part of education.  However, this doesn't mean that schools should isolate students from all situations that "may" be dangerous.  After watching the news, it appears that just going to school may be dangerous enough.  However, that's no reason to stop attending. 

The Cubby v. Compuserve case will play an important role in this situation.  The case found that the ISP can not be held responsible for content that is posted through its services.  Compuserve was treated like a book store rather than a publisher. The court found that they provided services that allowed people to communicate, but that they could not have reasonably been able to control all of its content. 

As I've stated before, schools need to handle this situation at the core of the problem - students need to learn how to responsibly use free speech. 
 
 

What implications does this present for allowing students to publish web pages? 

Students hold the primary responsibility for their work.  Instead of trying to completely shelter students, schools need to concentrate their efforts on teaching students to use free speech responsibly and to learn the implications of their work. 
 
 
 

Additional Resources 

Cubby v Compuserve 
Court case that ruled that Compuserve is held to the standard of a library with regard to its content. 

Blumenthal vs. Drudge 
Court case that stated America Online was immune from suits arising from content posted on AOL but was created by other parties. 

Why there is nothing wrong with the CDA 
Bruner, Ryan 
Under the section called Responsibility, the author takes the view that the author needs to take responsibility for their work.  However, be very careful when reviewing this document.  The authors overall opinion is not reflective of Freedom Freddy's opinion, however, they do agree on this specific issue. 

Liability for libel on the Internet: 
Uses the Cubby v.s Compuserve case point out why the author is ultimately responsible. 

Libel Online II 
Discusses how the Cubby v. Compuserve case helps establish the author as the responsible party regarding libel issues. 

INTERNET LIBEL: IS THE PROVIDER RESPONSIBLE? 
Discusses the role of the ISP.  Are they a book store owner or a publisher?  

Does a University reduce its likely liability by screening Netnews and the Web for offensive articles, newsgroups, and pages?  Computers and Academic Freedom 
Discussion includes prior restraints and the use of the Cubby v. Compuserve case to point out that liability might be less if material is not screened and that the responsibility should fall on the author. 
 

SHE SAYS:

 ISP 
Not only is the author responsible, but the service provider is also liable because they act as the publisher. Without their ability to make the content public, the problem would not have occurred. 

In the Stratton Oakmont vs. Prodigy case, the court found that Prodigy was liable for the content that they did not even author.  Prodigy was held accountable because they had promised that they would preview all material before it was posted.  Schools will need to be careful not to get caught in this same situation.  Most schools have already stated to parents that all student work on the Internet will be monitored.  This could place schools in the same position as Prodigy. 
 

What implications does this present for allowing students to publish web pages? 

This area presents a major concern for schools.  This is the primary reason why I think that students should not be allowed to even produce web pages on a school server.  It opens up unnecessary risk to the school district, yet provides only little chance for improving student achievement. 

Because of the Stratton Oakmont vs. Prodigy case, schools are placed in a lose-lose situation. Monitoring student work can make you accountable for their products.  Then again, don't monitor their work and the community will be upset that students are unsupervised.  How can schools meet their educational objectives in this type of environment? 
 
 

Additional Resources 

Libel Online III 
Discusses how the Stratton Oakmont vs. Prodigy case established that the ISP can be held accountable. 

Stratton Oakmont vs. Prodigy 
Court case that found Prodigy liable for content that was not  
Keeping it Legal: Questions Arising out of Web Site Management   McKenzie, Jamie 
Alerts educators to the serious issues that may arise from involving students in the development of  the school web site.  

A Legal and Educational Analysis of K-12 Internet Acceptable Use Policies   Willard, Nancy 
The section entitled "Student Speech" covers various considerations for school districts to protect themselves from possible litigation.  Willard would not fully agree with Sally's view, however, she would note that a school district needs to clearly define rules and regulations regarding student web pages.