Be careful what you say at FOFCentral

[John Galt]

While this is not a chat-room, this case is pretty interesting for determining if internet discussions in general take place in a traditional public forum.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Northeast/03/04/internet.defamation.ap/index.html

[Fritz]

Good Article John. I think that some people freely announce who they are, but others seek anonymity. We should, in most cases (and certainly in this one), protect that anonymity.

[rkmsuf]

To me that seems totally baseless. What are the damages?

[sabotai]

"defamation
n. the act of making untrue statements about another which damages his/her reputation. If the defamatory statement is printed or broadcast over the media it is libel and, if only oral, it is slander. Public figures, including officeholders and candidates, have to show that the defamation was made with malicious intent and was not just fair comment."

Does anyone know if the judge that is sueing has established that the comment 1) damaged her reputation (how many people can be in a chat room at once....), 2) Had malicious intent. ?

"Asked by Justice J. Michael Eakin what harm Melvin had suffered, her attorney replied that she was "humiliated, embarrassed. People shun her.""

People shun her because of a comment someone made in a chat room where..40? 50 tops...people saw it? Most of whom probably do not live in that state? Please.

[sabotai]

dola -

It's not just trailor park trash and freeloaders filling our courts with stupid lawsuits now.....the person sueing is a judge.

[rkmsuf]

answer: there are no damages...

[tucker342]

thats lame, why would she care if some random person on the internet said something bad about her. If the person said they were going to kill her, than I could see why, but otherwise I don't see the point.

[AgPete]

I think it's kind of funny. People may be forced to act more responsible now on the internet, what's this world coming to. ;)

And I thought my high speed connection was an expensive monthly cost. Wait until I start paying my legal bills after I talk sh*t about peope. :eek:

[Tarkus]

I told you guys to stop bad mouthing Bush! ;)

Tarkus

[couriers]

I think this was a heads up by John for us to stop bad mouthing him. :)

[CamEdwards]

I think ol' John's letting us know he's about to send Martha Burke a link to this site.

Those of you who referred to her as a bitch... break out your checkbook. :D

[HornsManiac]

After all of this time there is the cure.

I just need to become a measly public official.

Wow, a few hundred lawsuits against some of you guys and I could retire in the Bahamas before I turn 30.

Sweet!

HornsManiac

[stkelly52]

Obviously what was said in the chatroom did spread beyond just the 40-50 people, otherwise she would have never heard about it. I believe that it is important to not allow people to maliciously spread lies. Does it destroy character? Undoubtably. As word spreads people believe it and her reputation as a judge and a person is ruined.

[Chief Rum]

Originally posted by CamEdwards
I think ol' John's letting us know he's about to send Martha Burke a link to this site.

Those of you who referred to her as a bitch... break out your checkbook. :D

Sorry, Cam. It needs to be a falsehood. It is eminently proveable that she is indeed a bitch. :D

Chief Rum

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by HornsManiac
I just need to become a measly public official. Wow, a few hundred lawsuits against some of you guys and I could retire in the Bahamas before I turn 30. Sweet!LOL! And Horns goes from suspension one week to Ol' SkyDog's first QOTM entry the next....

[kcchief19]

It doesn't matter how many people saw the original chat message. If I posted here that Michael Jordan uses steroids and is coke head and only person sees it, but that person is Tom Brokaw and he reports that the story as rumors in on an Internet message board, then there has been serious harm. Jordan wouldn't have much of a case against Brokaw, since he was engaged in fair comment. If I made it up and it wasn't true, then I'm in deep.

This person simply needs to prove that it isn't true AND there has been some harm. Frankly, proving that it is not true is the harder test. Disproving guilt is one thing; proving innocence is another ball of wax.

As a history nut, I was amused by the comparison of the annonymous Internet message to Common Sense, since our Revolutionary fathers put out more than their fair share of propoganda that wasn't true. Pretty good comparison.

Frankly, I'm more worried about this from a right to privacy concern that anything else. If AOL is forced to turn the name over, where does the privacy line on the Internet move?

There is good news -- stating that Martha Burke is a bitch is an opinion, not a declaration of fact, so those of you in Hootie's camp are protected quite well.

[kcchief19]

Originally posted by SkyDog
LOL! And Horns goes from suspension one week to Ol' SkyDog's first QOTM entry the next....
Somebody here said something bad about HM that wasn't true? When?

-- kcchief ducking behind the FOFC couch --

[Fritz]

Originally posted by kcchief19
-- kcchief ducking behind the FOFC couch --

Thats not a couch, thats Kodos' ass.