Not signed in (Sign In)

Welcome, Guest

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below


Vanilla 1.1.4 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome Guest! Want to take part in these discussions? If you have an account, sign in now.
If you don't have an account, apply for one now.
    •  
      CommentAuthorm_tux
    • CommentTimeJul 22nd 2008
     permalink
    I just thought this was approiate with all the libel/slander that is being thrown around this site.. ;)  
     
    http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=5406538&page=1  
    Lawsuits Against Bloggers Seen Rising  
    Since 2004, 159 Court Actions Have Targeted Citizen Journalists for Libel and Other Charges  
    By HUMA YUSUF  
     
    July 20, 2008 —  
     
    When Christopher Grotke answered a late-night knock on the door, he did not expect to find the deputy sheriff on his doorstep serving notice that he was being sued. Nor was he prepared for the charge: libel.  
     
    Someone had posted a comment on his citizen-journalism Web site, iBrattleboro.com, stating that a woman in Brattleboro, Vt., was having an extramarital affair. The accused woman then sued Grotke and his Web site co-founder for failing to edit or delete the comment.  
     
    The blogging community increasingly is subject to lawsuits and threats of legal action running the gamut from subpoenas to cease-and-desist notices.  
     
    Since blogging became popular in about 2004, there have been 159 civil and criminal court actions involving bloggers, according to the nonprofit Media Law Resource Center (MLRC) in New York. Seven cases have resulted in verdicts against bloggers, with cumulative penalties totaling $18.5 million. Many more legal actions never result in trial.  
     
    The result? A stifling of free speech in a medium providing more comprehensive and diverse opportunities for commentary than ever before, digital-rights activists, media lawyers, and bloggers say.  
     
    "There is a chilling effect of a cease-and-desist letter or a legal threat that claims an aspect of a blogger's work could lead to liability, even when those claims are not well grounded," says Kurt Opsahl, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a nonprofit in San Francisco that defends digital rights.  
     
    Bloggers faced with legal threats often deem it easier to remove potentially offensive content rather than undertake the difficulty and expense of defending themselves, he adds.  
     
    Abroad, More Than 60 Bloggers Arrested  
     
    Bloggers face much bigger threats overseas, particularly if they criticize governments or point to human rights abuses.  
     
    Since 2003, 64 bloggers have been arrested around the world -- with Egypt, China, and Iran initiating more than half of those arrests, according to the World Information Access Report, published last month by the University of Washington. By contrast, the United States has arrested two in that period.  
     
    Still, online commentators face risks in the United States.  
     
    "In the developed world, bloggers can be punished through lawsuits," writes Philip Howard, a communications professor at the University of Washington, in an e-mail.  
     
    The number of lawsuits is growing, says Robert Cox, president of the Media Bloggers Association (MBA), a U.S.-based group devoted to protecting citizen journalists.  
     
    "As blogging expands and more people are aware of it," he says, "the lawyers are not far behind."  
     
    No one is suggesting that bloggers should have free rein to publish whatever they want.  
     
    "If you're slandering, you can be sued whether you have a blog or not," says Cox, a blogger himself. "You're not immune to defamation charges ... just because you're a citizen speaking your mind."  
     
    Who Should Educate the Bloggers?  
     
    There is no consensus, however, on how best to make bloggers aware of their legal responsibilities.  
     
    Many lawyers expect bloggers to figure it out themselves.  
     
    "If you're going to be responsible enough to manage a site where people post such things, you should be able to detect when things are defamatory and take them down," says Margot Stone, the lawyer for the woman who sued Grotke. "The problem is that technology is outpacing the ethical responsibilities. People haven't thought through the ethics of all this."  
     
    Online communities as well as media activists and lawyers are pushing to ensure that bloggers are aware of their legal rights and responsibilities.  
     
    The EFF and the Citizen Media Law Project (CMLP) -- an affiliate of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School -- offer detailed legal guides for bloggers. Both organizations also help bloggers find legal counsel.  
     
    In addition, the CMLP maintains a database of all legal action directed against bloggers.  
     
    "That way bloggers know they're not alone," explains David Ardia, director of the CMLP.  
     
    Other citizen-media groups say more proactive support is needed.  
     
    Since 2006, the MBA has been working with Media Pro Insurance to create the MBA Media Liability Insurance program.  
     
    "We're coming up with a product that covers defamation, copyright, privacy violations -- the same protections as newspapers -- for bloggers," says the group's Cox.  
     
    MBA members will receive a hefty discount on the insurance package, due to be launched at the end of this month. The cheapest coverage for a solo blogger will be $540 a year.  
     
    But some bloggers resist the idea.  
     
    "I don't have the money for that kind of thing," says Kathleen Seidel, a New Hampshire-based blogger who was subpoenaed this spring in connection with another lawsuit against vaccine manufacturers that she had written about on her blog.  
     
    Having written several posts about litigation and completed two legal courses at the local community college, Seidel was able to deflect legal threats against her blog and successfully composed a motion to quash the subpoena.  
     
    Grotke, too, was able to convince a Vermont court to dismiss libel charges.  
     
    Many bloggers, however, aren't so fortunate, which is why the online community is searching for ways to protect them.  
     
    "The effect of intimidation is a real one," Seidel says.  
     
    Copyright © 2008 ABC News Internet VenturesI'm crushing your head... You flathead!
  1. Other Topics You Might Like
    Advertised specials are mostly Fry's products
    How long before they fire you for going over/under F8 report? What are the policies?
    CD's and DVD's Are Going Away
    So apparently were going to be working on Thanskgiving Day from 5pm - 9pm
    How are things going in Natomas?
    •  
      CommentAuthorAyaHu
    • CommentTimeJul 22nd 2008
     permalink
    Yep.Superhero!
    •  
      CommentAuthoradmin
    • CommentTimeJul 22nd 2008
     permalink
    The site isn't registered under my name so they will have to go through Lebonon and Singapores goverments to find the registered owner.Contact Me: admin@frysforum.com [FrysForum Administration Group]
    •  
      CommentAuthorAyaHu
    • CommentTimeJul 22nd 2008
     permalink
    Yeah but the kid who wrote it can be sued, and I hope they are. You arent liable for the content of your site. They are though.Superhero!
    •  
      CommentAuthorSasquatch
    • CommentTimeJul 22nd 2008
     permalink
    I'm suing all of you. ALL OF YOU.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAyaHu
    • CommentTimeJul 22nd 2008
     permalink
    Sasquatch: I'm suing all of you. ALL OF YOU.
     
     
    We're e-wed, you can't sue me.Superhero!
    •  
      CommentAuthorSasquatch
    • CommentTimeJul 22nd 2008
     permalink
    You're sleeping on the e-couch tonight.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAyaHu
    • CommentTimeJul 22nd 2008
     permalink
    Sasquatch: You're sleeping on the e-couch tonight.
     
     
    You bastard! Im the one who sends you to the e-couch!Superhero!
    •  
      CommentAuthorSasquatch
    • CommentTimeJul 22nd 2008
     permalink
    That's it. No more e-sex either.
  2.  permalink
    if you need some just e-fuck me ayahui love it when they call me big papa
    •  
      CommentAuthorSasquatch
    • CommentTimeJul 22nd 2008
     permalink
    Such poise. Such eloquence. Beware, men of women, the biggysmalls draws near.
    •  
      CommentAuthorman
    • CommentTimeJul 22nd 2008 edited
     permalink
    You can't really go after service providers as they can't be liable for user generated content. They should be liable if they don't comply to a request for removal within a timely matter of course.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSasquatch
    • CommentTimeJul 22nd 2008
     permalink
    What constitutes timely?
    •  
      CommentAuthorworm
    • CommentTimeJul 22nd 2008
     permalink
    You might want to pull out a stopwatch.i am a worm.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAyaHu
    • CommentTimeJul 22nd 2008
     permalink
    Sasquatch: What constitutes timely?
     
    3,982 seconds.Superhero!
    •  
      CommentAuthorRuiner
    • CommentTimeJul 23rd 2008
     permalink
    admin: The site isn't registered under my name so they will have to go through Lebonon and Singapores goverments to find the registered owner.
     
     
    AyaHu: Yeah but the kid who wrote it can be sued, and I hope they are. You arent liable for the content of your site. They are though.
     
     
    Again, this is a misconception of a lot of people. Greg's mom attempted to sue me for the content of my site a long time ago but they failed. As it was explained to me by the investigating person, this site is your property. It has already been acknowledged by you that you know what is going on and you know what kind of posts are posted on this site. You can't deny that it isn't going on. A jury would never side with you on the basis of "you didn't know what was going on and you didn't take actions to prevent slander and libel." That said, if you didn't know it was going on because there were thousands of posts a day, you could get away with it.  
     
    Imagine it was your property or house. If someone was selling drugs out of you 100 square foot house, you would know about it and you would be held liable for it. But, if someone was selling drugs on your 10,000 acres, you could easily say you didn't know about it.  
     
    It boils down to, "What would a jury decide?" I have sat on a jury and they are the most 'non-thinking' people in the world. So, if you think you can't be held liable for what is on this site, think again. It is all a matter of interpretation of the law.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSasquatch
    • CommentTimeJul 23rd 2008
     permalink
    [It has already been acknowledged by you that you know what is going on and you know what kind of posts are posted on this site. You can't deny that it isn't going on. A jury would never side with you on the basis of "you didn't know what was going on and you didn't take actions to prevent slander and libel."]  
     
    Not true. First off, slander is spoken, libel is written, so any defamation on this site would fall into the definition of libel. Secondly, it's only libel if it's not true. If Mary Tran, or who the fuck ever, is really having sex with half the store, it's fair game to say. How would our noble admin know what is fact and what is fiction? One more reason, on a pile of many, why there can be no successful legal action taken.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSasquatch
    • CommentTimeJul 23rd 2008
     permalink
    Sassassinated!
    •  
      CommentAuthorRuiner
    • CommentTimeJul 23rd 2008 edited
     permalink
    Sasquatch:Not true. First off, slander is spoken, libel is written, so any defamation on this site would fall into the definition of libel. Secondly, it's only libel if it's not true. If Mary Tran, or who the fuck ever, is really having sex with half the store, it's fair game to say. How would our noble admin know what is fact and what is fiction? One more reason, on a pile of many, why there can be no successful legal action taken.
     
     
    The written content of this site doesn't create rumors or conversation at work? If it does, then it is both.  
     
    When did common sense leave people natural instinct? Instead of spreading rumors, verify the information to be true. If you don't, you are just looking like an ass to everyone. To say that someone is sleeping with half the store is quite a far fetched argument that could easily be contested and proven false. It doesn't matter who is right or who is wrong, it boils down to who has the stronger army of lawyers and right now, Fry's would win that battle. Fry's has so much leverage on this site it is unbelievable. Whether you want to admit it or not, they do.  
     
    Better hope that Fry's isn't a company that purchases Google Ad's.  
     
    EDIT:  
     
    In addition, if you and the admin of this site are so sure of yourselves and you all don't have anything to hide, why did he make it so that to find his identity you had to "go through Lebonon and Singapores government?" Sounds like he isn't too sure about his claim of being untouchable.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAyaHu
    • CommentTimeJul 23rd 2008
     permalink
    However, my friend, if, in your 'terms of service' which everyone by reading or participating in this thread read, you state that you have no liability for content, you can more than likely get away with it.  
     
    And like Sass said, you have no knowledge of these people. If Tran girl came and said "Hey will you remove this post its offensive" Im sure you would. And the other guy may still get sued for his remarks.Superhero!
    •  
      CommentAuthorRuiner
    • CommentTimeJul 23rd 2008
     permalink
    AyaHu: However, my friend, if, in your 'terms of service' which everyone by reading or participating in this thread read, you state that you have no liability for content, you can more than likely get away with it.
     
     
    Two failures here:  
     
    There is no digital signature required and there is no modification date posted on the TOS. He could have updated the TOS today - did I still agree to it?  
     
    Again, I have looked through all of this in the years of fighting the psychotic Greg (stated to me on the phone by his mother) and his sue-happy mother. Since Greg owns this site, he can remove the above statements for me.
    •  
      CommentAuthoradmin
    • CommentTimeJul 23rd 2008
     permalink
    Greg doesn't own this site.  
     
    Read about Section 230 Protection:  
     
    http://w2.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.phpContact Me: admin@frysforum.com [FrysForum Administration Group]
    •  
      CommentAuthorasdf
    • CommentTimeJul 23rd 2008 edited
     permalink
    Ruiner:
    AyaHu: However, my friend, if, in your 'terms of service' which everyone by reading or participating in this thread read, you state that you have no liability for content, you can more than likely get away with it.
     
     
    Two failures here:  
     
    There is no digital signature required and there is no modification date posted on the TOS. He could have updated the TOS today - did I still agree to it?  
     
    Again, I have looked through all of this in the years of fighting the psychotic Greg (stated to me on the phone by his mother) and his sue-happy mother. Since Greg owns this site, he can remove the above statements for me.
     
     
     
    The terms and conditions exactly match with the software vendor:  
     
    http://lussumo.com/community/termsofservice.php  
     
    http://frysforum.com/termsofservice.php
    •  
      CommentAuthorSasquatch
    • CommentTimeJul 23rd 2008
     permalink
    Being an ass is not criminal.
    •  
      CommentAuthorRuiner
    • CommentTimeJul 23rd 2008
     permalink
    admin: Greg doesn't own this site.  
     
    Read about Section 230 Protection:  
     
    http://w2.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php
     
     
    I have read it and it doesn't mean they can't bring litigation against you which would make you get a lawyer, spend a lot of time and money on protecting yourself, make your life a living hell, harass you, prevent you from getting a job and many other things.  
     
    If you think that link protects you from that, good luck. I have never head anyone back down from a lawsuit because some else presented an URL at trial.  
     
    "But, Your Honor, I haz links!"  
    "Case Dismissed upon kitties links verification!"
    •  
      CommentAuthoradmin
    • CommentTimeJul 23rd 2008
     permalink
    Users can also request removal of discussions and comments via private messaging on the site and by sending email to admin@frysforum.comContact Me: admin@frysforum.com [FrysForum Administration Group]
    •  
      CommentAuthorasdf
    • CommentTimeJul 23rd 2008
     permalink
    Ruiner:
    admin: Greg doesn't own this site.  
     
    Read about Section 230 Protection:  
     
    http://w2.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php
     
     
    I have read it and it doesn't mean they can't bring litigation against you which would make you get a lawyer, spend a lot of time and money on protecting yourself, make your life a living hell, harass you, prevent you from getting a job and many other things.  
     
    If you think that link protects you from that, good luck. I have never head anyone back down from a lawsuit because some else presented an URL at trial.  
     
    "But, Your Honor, I haz links!"  
    "Case Dismissed upon kitties links verification!"
     
    All you do is present previous rulings of similar cases presenting Section 230 and the case is dismissed. You won't even need a lawyer for it.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSasquatch
    • CommentTimeJul 23rd 2008
     permalink
    Presidents. Helping judges make it to their afternoon golf games since Business vs. Pleasure[1916].