It's just another issue in the long-standing debate over who's ultimately responsible for the content on the internet.

As an employee of ... say... Denny's--if you make an inappropriate comment, Denny's is ultimately responsible and liable... correct?

As a seller for eBay... this is for ya lawyers... correct me when I misunderstand our fine capitalistic system... eBay is acting as a Broker to enable the Seller to sell their wares to a ready, willing and able Buyer... correct so far? So, as such, the Seller is now an Agent of the Broker (eBay)... correct? So, here's where I'm going... don't most states agency laws hold the Broker ultimately responsible and liable for their Agents actions?

Sooooo... eBay would be accountable for any libel published on their website?

Who knows... I'm sure eBay's General Counsel has always been prepared for this type of action to be filed... here's the tricky part though... filed in California (I assume that's where eBay is physically located, but they're probably incorporated in Delaware). But it's an internet-based business with no proven case law... correct?

As far as taxes are concerned, that's been a law for a looonnnngggg time and I don't think anyone could argue it's legality. However, if it's an internet-based business, does California (or any other state) have jurisdiction over records generated specifically and exclusively on the internet?

The interenet is an International entity... so, who has authority--the United Nations? Is the internet it's own soverignty? Okay... so I know NOTHING about the law!

I do know one thing... every profession have their good apples and their bad apples... life's too short to let it affect your health.

If you're a good lawyer, those you meet and impact will know it to be true... if you're not... I'll be the one to hire you when I need a good lawyer to get me out of a jam... it's known as "LaFoe's Law"!

btw, someone left me a negative comment on eBay... can anyone recommend a good lawyer?