they claim protection against the Fair Housing Act: if I remember right, the rationale of Congress giving protection to online publishers of third party content was that the internet was an emerging technology that needed protection and that such providers just couldn't afford it and thus couldn't provide the service in the first place...
well, how true are those premises for the craigslist of today?
-- is the internet still an emerging technology? (I would think not...)
-- could craigslist really NOT afford it? (depends on their profits, doesn't it?); it also depends on their willingness to do it and their moral compass etc. (why isn't anybody talking about those things? they use those claims havily as PR, shouldn't they have to make good on them? what's with all this rampant bullshit? and how is possible that the media doesn't notice this or..."forgets" to notice it?)
P.S. Maybe a lawsuit of this kind could compel craigslist to disclose their profits? (something they should have voluntarily done all along...) D.