Chat Boards

And that's where report buttons come in, so something like that can be pointed out. BWW made a rod for its own back by not having one (and from the tone of it, I couldn't see much evidence of any moderation at all). Moderators shouldn't be left to clear up it's up to everyone to keep the place tidy.

There are laws which set the boundaries of free speech regarding libel, slander and such. Some allegations or rumours are just best off being deleted straight away, say if a producer is accused of financial impropriety or private information about a performer's health status and such. Even if things turn out to be true it's best left to those with deep pockets to take the risk of saying so.

How bad was it on there?

You cannot misrepresent facts, that's the crux of  the issue, opinions are no problem at all as long as you aren't throwing around factual misrepresentations.

If you post a lie knowingly or unknowingly, even just linking to it, then you can be prosecuted. 'Bulletin Boards' are treated as slander rather than libel I believe so there is some leeway but if you cannot prove that it is true and that it is seen to be damaging then you are up the creek without a paddle. There may not be a large readership on BWW for example, but if there is a false story about an actor's health problems, say, and that is likely to be read by casting agents, producers, directors or anyone who might have their view affected by that untruth, then the size of the readership doesn't matter.

As many on twitter have subsequently found out, just retweeting something isn't guilt free either, neither is ignorance.

You may have a couple of defences though; if what you said has been in the public domain and has been widely spread or, particularly important for here, through 'fair comment' so that you can give negative opinions on whatever you want until the cows come home, as long as you don't misrepresent the facts. I believe the US law is more lax. There's long been a movement to reform the English law, and they are by no means perfect, but they're what we have.

Both libel (putting a lie in writing that damages someone's reputation) and slander (telling a lie verbally, including in a recording, that damages someone's reputation) are equally bad in the law.

They are not criminal, so you cannot be prosecuted.

They are torts, so the damage they do to the person's reputation is measured in money, which you can be sued for.

The US, like most of the rest of the world, is FAR more lax than the UK, which is the capital of the world for defamation lawsuits. The difference is that in the US, the person saying they are defamed must prove the statement untrue. Whereas, in the UK, the person making the statement must PROVE IT TO BE TRUE.

There are many many things which are true, but which you cannot PROVE to be true. The Daily Star told some harsh truths about Jeffrey Archer, but when he sued them, he won, because they couldn't prove the things they said. Later, Archer was jailed for perjury, which IS a crime (unlike defamation), as he lied in court by falsely alleging libel.

When it comes to libel on forums, mods who approve posts before they appear, are in danger of being sued as well, as they take an active decision to approve the post.

Here, where posts appear immediately, mods are much safer, but they have the obligation to consider any complaints about posts made. And if they ignore a libel complaint that later proves to be correct, they can find themselves sued as well. The safest course of action, if someone makes a libel complaint, is to delete the post.