Legal action on posts/threads

[Pat494]

Re: A new forum - just for me!

The legal issue is not about the truth of the actual post(s) made, it is about how they are made and if they are potentially in breach of any law. I'm no expert on the complexity of these laws, defamation is complex enough, overlaying the internet onto this just makes it even more of a minefield.

This is why we have to pay for legal help. They may be silly threats to the observer but I assure you they are not silly as far as the complainant is concerned and they are most definately not silly as far as the law is concerned.

Also may I point out that THE LAW is very different from country to country, the internet is international.
Also some of the less tolerant Governments can get very upset over comments true or otherwise.
The legal vultures ( er gentlemen ) profit from this hugely and UK & Human Rights courts are daft enough to find in their favour.

 

[numbertea]

I have an acquaintance who was sued for a post where he used defamatory language about a company. It got thrown out it court as the business couldn't prove loss but it wasted much of my buddy's time and money. I think I probably won't mention company names as a rule, now that I think about it.

Rediculous.

 

[Pat494]

I have an acquaintance who was sued for a post where he used defamatory language about a company. It got thrown out it court as the business couldn't prove loss but it wasted much of my buddy's time and money. I think I probably won't mention company names as a rule, now that I think about it.

Rediculous.

Did he try to prove his allegations were true and therefore he was entitled to make them ?
or
did the company try to prove his allegations untrue ?

From your post it seems the case was decided on loss caused.

Another interesting aspect of that case is - would it have made a difference if he had been a foreigner ? It is a commonly held belief that the extradition treaty between the UK and US favours the US. But I am no lawyer and that is hearsay.

 

[numbertea]

He was reprimanded verbally by the judge, the extent of his punishment. He was allowed to express his opinion and the matter was subjective enough that the business couldn't prove loss due to the comment. US company trying to sue for slander, they lost but my acquaintance couldn't claim reparations per the judge.

 

[Pat494]

As the internet is relatively new there are probably not many cases that have gone to court. Therefore not many precedents set. UK common law builds up over the years and judges tend to follow previous judgements. Perhaps the same in the US ?
However every now and again the Govt passes laws which " clarify " this situation and take precedence over case law.

Might be a happy hunting ground for young lawyers out to make a quick buck.

 

[Trader333]

As the internet is relatively new there are probably not many cases that have gone to court

There are enough cases already to have set quite a few precedents although what is happening is that new cases are changing the currently accepted view to a newer one.

 

[Pat494]

There are enough cases already to have set quite a few precedents although what is happening is that new cases are changing the currently accepted view to a newer one.

A newer one ? Which is ?

 

[Trader333]

I was referring to the fact that bulletin board owners in the past may have removed posts based on what a current similar test case resulted in at the time. Then a new case results in posts being allowed to remain and then again another case results in them having to be removed. This is why it is difficult to have consistent policy in this area and why every instance requires advice based on what is currently happening in European law. An example would be that owners of bulletin boards were not classified as publishers in the same way as newspapers would be and that defence was valid as a basis in law when challenged and was all based on the result of a test case. However, there has recently been some success in challenging this which changes the whole basis of what is a publisher and what is not.

 

[Pat494]

I was referring to the fact that bulletin board owners in the past may have removed posts based on what a current similar test case resulted in at the time. Then a new case results in posts being allowed to remain and then again another case results in them having to be removed. This is why it is difficult to have consistent policy in this area and why every instance requires advice based on what is currently happening in European law. An example would be that owners of bulletin boards were not classified as publishers in the same way as newspapers would be and that defence was valid as a basis in law when challenged and was all based on the result of a test case. However, there has recently been some success in challenging this which changes the whole basis of what is a publisher and what is not.

What a playground for lawyers to revel in.
There is of course the poster, who is also involved. Yes I see this as an area for many a lawsuit.