| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mack4289
Joined: 06 Dec 2006
|
 Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 5:26 am Post subject: slander on the net- what are the limits? |
 |
|
Apparently, Korea isn't the only country whose companies are trying to crack down on negative comments about them on the net.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/10/07/business/net08.php?page=1
"When a billionaire born in Uzbekistan and an outspoken former British ambassador clashed over a scorching blog, the first outcome was the Internet equivalent of a smackdown.
The daily Web log, or blog, of the former U.K. ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, vanished after Murray's British Internet provider received a flurry of ominous legal letters demanding the removal of "potentially defamatory" information about Alisher Usmanov, a mining mogul with a rising stake in the English soccer club Arsenal.
Murray's odyssey began in early September when he posted a pejorative description of Usmanov on his blog.
Schillings, a London law firm specializing in media entertainment, then fired back for Usmanov with legal warnings to Fasthosts, the blog's Internet service provider, demanding elimination of the posting within 24 hours.
More letters followed and by the fourth complaint, Fasthosts simply deactivated the Web site - along with two other servers, shutting down more than a dozen other sites, including that of a British member of Parliament.
"It's extremely scary that this can happen, because they can take down something without anything being tested in court, without any legal sanction at all except a letter from a high-priced lawyer," Murray said in an interview. "I'm very happy to have this tested in court. Why don't they do that? Because that will bring together people who know the truth of the matter."
... Companies in the United States, Canada and Australia have moved against bloggers to remove copyrighted material with takedown complaints or have demanded removal of critical comments posted by blog visitors.
But British bloggers are particularly vulnerable to defamation complaints because of a previous court ruling that found that Internet providers qualified as publishers of libelous material if they did not react when alerted about a problem."
It's hard to know exactly what to say about this, since the IHT never publishes exactly what was said on these blogs. But if your opinions of a company can be called slander, that would have a lot of negative implications. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 5:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Going off topic class action law suits against conspiracy sites for slander ought to be allowed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 5:34 pm Post subject: Re: slander on the net- what are the limits? |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Going off topic class action law suits against conspiracy sites for 'slander' ought to be allowed. |
Ah yes, the conspirators would love this ... wouldn't they ... JOO?
| mack4289 wrote: |
| But if your opinions of a company can be called slander, that would have a lot of negative implications. |
Reminds me of the amazing free speech rights they have in China.
You can say anything you like, just so long as it's PC & thereby has BIG BROTHER'S BLESSING 
THOUGHT CRIME
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Crimes |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 5:52 pm Post subject: Re: slander on the net- what are the limits? |
|
|
igotthisguitar"][
| Quote: |
| Ah yes, the conspirators would love this ... wouldn't they ... JOO? |
Itt make the conspiracy people think twice before putting out info that they know is false.
9-11 conspiracy theorist sites are not sincere people looking for the truth they are people who wish to weaken or even overthrow the govenment cause as long as it is functioning they have no chance of acheiving their poltiical and social goals. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 5:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Itt make the conspiracy people think twice before putting out info that they know is false. |
What they KNOW is false? That's absurd, why would anyone do this?
This would mean they're all disinfo agents.
Is this what you believe?
What of those investigators who sincerely believe what they profess?
For each claim which is made, there are only 2 real possibilities.
1) They're misinformed.
2) They're correct.
You honestly expect anyone to believe this crap?
We all know you want to censor the truth ... JOO.
What do they pay you to sit at your desk all day? Regular 8 hour shift?
EVERYBODY KNOWS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
="igotthisguitar"]
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Itt make the conspiracy people think twice before putting out info that they know is false. |
| Quote: |
What they KNOW is false? That's absurd, why would anyone do this? |
cause they wish to cause social disorder.
| Quote: |
This would mean they're all disinfo agents.
Is this what you believe? |
disinformation artists who hate the US government.
| Quote: |
What of those investigators who sincerely believe what they profess?
For each claim which is made, there are only 2 real possibilities.
1) They're misinformed.
2) They're correct. |
Jeff Rense , Michael Rivero , you know your type of guys don't believe most of what is on their sites.
| Quote: |
You honestly expect anyone to believe this crap?
We all know you want to censor the truth ... JOO. |
That is the truth about you and your conspiracy sites.
| Quote: |
What do they pay you to sit at your desk all day? Regular 8 hour shift?
EVERYBODY KNOWS |
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mack4289
Joined: 06 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I would complain about this going off-topic, but if not for you guys there probably wouldn't have been a response at all. In regards to suing conspiracy theorists, that's unnecessary and makes the conspiracy theories seem more compelling than they are. The government has more than enough opportunities to get their side of the story across, and shouldn't need to resort to lawsuits to refute those theories. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mack4289 wrote: |
| I would complain about this going off-topic, but if not for you guys there probably wouldn't have been a response at all. In regards to suing conspiracy theorists, that's unnecessary and makes the conspiracy theories seem more compelling than they are. The government has more than enough opportunities to get their side of the story across, and shouldn't need to resort to lawsuits to refute those theories. |
If people go around saying that Bush bombed up the world trade center it is probably intentional disinformation and slander.
I think the conspiracy theorists who demand invesigations ought not be afraid to have what they they say investigated.
What they do is intentional slander as a tactic to create social disorder.
They are not much a threat nevertheless what they do is wrong and they ought to be held accountable if they intentional put of information designed to misinform people on the net.
What they do is not free speach it is slander and they ought to subject to class action law suits by US citizens for it .
I have an interest in seeing the US do well and so it does effect me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
If people go around saying that Bush bombed up the world trade center it is probably intentional disinformation and slander.
|
I don't think that the slander laws apply to well-known political leaders in quite the same way that they apply to everyone else. I'm no legal scholar, but it would seem to me that the fact that you're already in a powerful office, and making life-or-death decisions on a regular basis, puts you in a somewhat different category than the average person. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
If people go around saying that Bush bombed up the world trade center
it is ... probably intentional disinformation and slander. |
Well, maybe he DID have a hand in it
Test the hypothesis.
p.s. 'intentional' disinformation? redundant JOO-speak. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Quote: |
If people go around saying that Bush bombed up the world trade center it is probably intentional disinformation and slander.
|
I don't think that the slander laws apply to well-known political leaders in quite the same way that they apply to everyone else. I'm no legal scholar, but it would seem to me that the fact that you're already in a powerful office, and making life-or-death decisions on a regular basis, puts you in a somewhat different category than the average person. |
It depends they are not doing it just cause they hate Bush I think they do it cause they want to weaken or overthrow the US government - not only Bush. It is not just them against Bush. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
igotthisguitar"][
| Quote: |
| Well, maybe he DID have a hand in it :idea |
:
Test the hypothesis.
You have tested the hypothesis and look where it got you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
WHAT EXACTLY CONSTITUTES SLANDER?
A disagreeable opinion?
Anyways, the entire Bush Presidency completely lacks legitimacy.
It is premised on 2 clearly fraudulent 'elections'.
The SPARTAN emperor wears no clothes.
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Well, maybe he DID have a hand in it :idea |
:
Test the hypothesis.
You have tested the hypothesis and ... look where it got you. |
Why do you mean exactly? 
i'm not an authority on these matters.
People have to decide what the truth is for themselves 
Last edited by igotthisguitar on Mon Oct 08, 2007 7:01 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
It depends they are not doing it just cause they hate Bush I think they do it cause they want to weaken or overthrow the US government - not only Bush. It is not just them against Bush.
|
Well, lots of people want to overthrow the US government, Joo. Conspiracy theorists, Trostskyists, Maoists, right-wing gun nuts, etc. If you want to prosecute everyone who ever publically fantasized about overthrowing the US government, that's gonna be a pretty major backlof in the courts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 7:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Well, lots of people want to overthrow the US government, Joo. Conspiracy theorists, Trostskyists, Maoists, right-wing gun nuts, etc. If you want to prosecute everyone who ever publically fantasized about overthrowing the US government, that's gonna be a pretty major backlof in the courts. |
You forgot to mention Democrats, Constitutionalists & 3rd Party Presidential candidates |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
