Publishing non-public figure name in a website
<p>Is the following statement reasonable?</p>

<p>"It seems to me that since you are not a public figure, you should be permitted to control your own name and they should not be able to simply include you in their site against your wishes."</p>

<p>Is it viable to ask RateMyProfessors.com to remove my entry based on this argument when there are defamatory posting on the site?</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Is the following statement reasonable?</p>
  
  <p>"It seems to me that since you are not a public figure, you should be
  permitted to control your own name and they should not be able to
  simply include you in their site against your wishes."</p>
</blockquote>

<p>It might be a reasonable statement of what some people think that the law should be, but it is not an accurate statement of the law. The First Amendment denies you the right to control your own name and you have absolutely no right to prohibit a website from including it against your wishes.</p>

<p>You've asked this questions multiple time in different guises and the answer is the same.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Is it viable to ask RateMyProfessors.com to remove my entry based on
  this argument when there are defamatory posting on the site?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>No. Defamation is never a valid ground to force a website to remove user content. You could sue the person posting it for defamation if you did so within the short statute of limitations and you could figure out who made the post, but you also can't sue a website for user content as a result of Section 230. Also, even if you prevailed against the user who posted the content, a takedown order would not bind the website.</p>

privacy defamation