internet liability international
Would a community website be liable if members took it upon themselves to start privately trading items between each other?
<p>Consider a scenario where a community site, based in Switzerland, with an international member base has two memberships: free accounts and premium subscription-paying accounts. The primary service provided by the website is education as well as providing research tools. However, one feature of the paid subscription is a facility whereby members can send offers to the owner of an item they are interested in. </p>

<p>Consider the below two members:</p>

<ul>
<li><p><code>Member X</code> (free account) has posted photos and details of an item for community interest. </p></li>
<li><p><code>Member Y</code> (premium account) sees this and decides to offer to buy the item:</p></li>
</ul>

<p>After the following process, <code>Member Y</code> claims to have received a fake/inferior item:</p>

<ol>
<li><p><strong><code>Member Y</code> makes contact</strong> by entering a value and and clicks a button to submit the blind speculative offer to <code>Member X</code></p></li>
<li><p><strong><code>Member X</code> receives the offer</strong> price as well as <code>Member Y</code>'s country and community reputation, and can then choose whether or accept/reject/counter the offer</p></li>
<li><p><strong><code>Member Y</code> transfers payment:</strong> through paypal (for example) and <code>Member X</code> then ships the item</p></li>
</ol>

<p>Considering that <code>Member X</code> never marketed the item for sale but only decided and agreed to sell after receiving an initial purchase offer from <code>Member Y</code>, as well as the fact that the site neither 1) sell items or 2) provides an online store for members to sell items...</p>

<p>Is the site liable due to having a facility for subscription members reaching out to make blind bids to other members items? </p>

<p>I am not a Lawyer, I am not your Lawyer.</p>

<p>This really depends on the country in which the company owning the website is domiciled and where it operates.
For example, if the company is based in the U.S. and only markets in the U.S., only U.S. laws apply. If the company is based in the U.S. and markets in the U.K., they may be subject to U.K. laws. Assuming that the company is based in the U.S.:</p>

<p>If the website does not market itself as a trading platform nor gives any reasonable expectation that it is a trading platform (e.g., by adding "contact to buy buttons"), then the company would have no reasonable liability for any transactions. They may still be involved with any legal case that deals with the transaction (emails and such). If Member Y made such claim, they would have to take it up with the Member X in court. </p>

<p>Think about it this way: You see an item on Pinterest you like, you then contact the use to buy it, that user sells the item to you, you don't like it. Pinterest would not be liable for the damages done. </p>

<p>Even if the site was a trading platform, they don't have any reasonable liability for goods sold on there site. Only direct sellers have liability. </p>

<p>As an added protection, your TOS should include something like:</p>

<p><code>site</code> is not a venue for commerce.</p>

<p><code>site</code> is not responsible for communication. <code>site</code> does not pre-screen users (except for services that require an application) or the content or information provided by users. If users wish to conduct transaction on the site, <code>site</code> does not transfer legal ownership of items from the seller to the buyer. You may also wish to consider using a third-party escrow service or services that provide additional user verification.</p>

<p>You agree that <code>site</code> is NOT a venue for commerce and as such is not responsible or liable for any content, for example, data, text, information, usernames, graphics, images, photographs, profiles, audio, video, items, and links posted by you, other users, or outside parties on <code>site</code>. You use the <code>site</code> service at your own risk.</p>

<p>There's a different way of approaching questions like this that could obviate what may be an expensive and unsettled legal question:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Try to buy liability insurance.  Let the insurance company underwrite, price, and assume the legal risk.</p></li>
<li><p>Take advantage of the corporate shield.  Maintain a minimum of assets in the company so that it is not an attractive target for litigation.  Because being legally right is not an airtight defense against being attacked in civil litigation.</p></li>
</ol>
