Opinion ID: 202645
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Interactive Computer Service Provider

Text: There is no merit to UCS's suggestion that Lycos might not be a provider of an interactive computer service and so is not entitled to Section 230 immunity. The statute defines interactive computer service to be any information service, system, or access -13- software provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server, including specifically a service or system that provides access to the Internet. 47 U.S.C. § 230(f)(2). A web site, such as the Raging Bull site, enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server, namely, the server that hosts the web site. Therefore, web site operators, such as Lycos, are providers of interactive computer services within the meaning of Section 230. UCS argues that Lycos might not be such a provider because it does not provide user access to the internet. Providing access to the Internet is, however, not the only way to be an interactive computer service provider. While such providers are specifically included, there is no indication that the definition should be so limited. Other courts have reached the same conclusion. See, e.g., Carafano, 339 F.3d at 1123.