One thing the Internet has taught us: if you want to see a defamatory/embarrassing/ridiculous claim about yourself or your business cleaned from the tubes, the one thing you don't want to do is file an ill-advised lawsuit against a site like Wikipedia. What once was known only by a few is suddenly known by the world. Barbara Bauer, who runs the Barbara Bauer Literary Agency, looks like she's set to learn that lesson the hard way after suing Wikipedia for an article that called her the "Dumbest of the Twenty Worst" literary agents and said that she had made no book sales at all.
The controversy stems from a few brief statements regarding Bauer's track record (none of which remain on the site at this time). These statements weren't simply dragged from the ether; Bauer was included on a list of the twenty worst agents back in 2006 and that list was widely circulated in the blogosphere. The controversy was discussed at the time by writer Teresa Nielsen Hayden, who called Bauer a "well-known scam agent" and the "dumbest of the twenty worst." Even before that, writers were complaining about her agency in various discussion forums.
Bauer's alleged faults are the usual ones that you hear about in the unregulated world of literary agents. For instance, Victoria Strauss of Writer Beware noted that she had "been tracking Barbara Bauer since 1997. We have ample documentation, supported by reports and complaints from writers, that she charges a 'processing fee' (currently $55), a 'marketing' fee (currently $650), and over the years has charged other kinds of fees, such as a one-time 'retainer' of $1,000. I've heard from writers who received profane and abusive responses when they questioned the fees or other aspects of her business, and I've also heard from former clients who say she contacted them only when it was time to send in an annual check."
Most reputable agents are members of the Association of Authors' Representatives, which has a policy against reading fees. Bauer is not a member, according to its database.
When Wikipedia refused to remove the offending comments, Bauer sued the site in a New Jersey court. Lawyers representing Wikipedia have now responded (PDF), arguing that the claims should be tossed because Wikipedia is protected by federal law from comments made by its users.
That law, of course, is the Communications Decency Act, which generally holds service providers and forum operators harmless from content posted by their users (this principle is what protects Ars from liability regarding the crazier goings-on in our own forums). Aggrieved parties can still file suit, but they have to go after the poster, not the company that provides the place to post. The Wikipedia lawyers argue that the law is so clear on these matters that Bauer's "frivolous" lawsuit against the site should be dismissed immediately... after which it will no doubt be written up on Wikipedia.
