40 Cal. 4th 33 - Barrett v. Rosenthal’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 67 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 117 later decisions — most recently December 2020 · most notably Fair Housing Council v. Roommates.com, LLC (2008), 159 Cal. App. 4th 1027 - NYGÅRD, INC. v. Uusi-Kerttula (2008)
17 federal appellate · 67 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 17 U.S.C. § 512 (§ 202 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act) · 47 U.S.C. § 230 (Communications Decency Act § 230) · 47 U.S.C. § 941
Relies on Duncan v. Walker · Consumer Product Safety Commission v. GTE Sylvania, Inc. · Gustafson v. Alloyd Co. · George Duncan Superintendent Great Meadow Correctional Facility v. Sherman Walker · Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 117 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]eb sites accessible to the public ... are 'public forums' for purposes of the anti-SLAPP statute.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“publisher's traditional editorial functions”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. 5 Cal. 5th 522 - Hassell v. Bird · Fair Housing Council of San Fernando Valley the Fair Housing Council of San Diego, Individually and on Behalf of the General Public v. roommates.com, Llc, Fair Housing Council of San Fernando Valley the Fair Housing Council of San Diego, Individually and on Behalf of the General Public v. roommate.com, LLC“The Committee notes that ISPs have successfully defended many lawsuits using section 230(c). The courts have correctly interpreted section 230(c), which was aimed at protecting against liability for such claims as negligence ( See, e.g., Doe v. America Online, 783 So.2d 1010 (Fla.2001)) and defamation ( Ben Ezra, Weinstein, and Co. v. America Online, 206 F.3d 980 (2000); Zeran v. America Online, 129 F.3d 327 (1997)). The Committee intends these interpretations of section 230(c) to be equally applicable to those entities covered by H.R. 3833.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.