Inc. Zeran v. America Online

Kenneth M. Zeran operated a home-based business in Seattle, Washington, that depended on his telephone for access to the public. On 25 April 1995, six days after the bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City, an unidentified person posted a message on an AOL bulletin board advertising "Naughty Oklahoma T-Shirts." The shirts featured offensive slogans related to the bombing. The name "Ken" and Zeran's Seattle telephone number were given as the contact for those interested in purchasing the shirts. Zeran, immediately inundated with calls that included derogatory messages and death threats, called AOL and explained his problem. AOL responded that the posting would be removed, but as a matter of policy AOL would not post a retraction.

The next day, another posting advertised additional shirts with new slogans, again offering Zeran's number as a contact and encouraging interested parties to continue to call back due to high demand. The postings continued for four days, with new items and slogans being added to the offering. By 30 April, Zeran was receiving abusive phone calls about every two minutes, some containing death threats.

During this time, a copy of the first AOL posting was sent to the Oklahoma City radio station KRXO. On 1 May a KRXO announcer read the message on the air, attributed the authorship to "Ken" at Zeran's phone number, and urged listeners to call the Seattle number. Zeran was inundated with calls from Oklahoma City that contained violent language and death threats.

Zeran notified the local police and the Seattle FBI, and remained in contact with AOL and KRXO regarding the incidents. AOL assured Zeran that the subscriber's account would soon be closed. Local police began surveillance of Zeran's home to protect him. Finally, an Oklahoma City newspaper exposed the AOL postings as a hoax, and KRXO made an on-air apology. By 14 May 1995 the number of abusive calls to Zeran subsided to 15 a day. In January of 1996 Zeran filed suit against KRXO in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma and in April, he filed a separate suit in the same court against AOL. He could not bring action against the party who posted the messages because of AOL's failure to maintain adequate records of its subscribers.

Zeran alleged AOL was liable for defamatory speech initiated by a third party. Zeran argued that once notified, AOL had an obligation to remove the messages, notify other subscribers that they were false, and to screen against future postings. AOL used Section 230 of CDA as its defense. The case was transferred to the Eastern District of Virginia which ruled in favor of AOL. Zeran appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals.