Accident this Saturday - topic moved

[Clevis Hitch]

for real, you thought that was me? Why, was the thread about hating on me. If I said that about any one thread then I'd have to be saying that about all the threads. Why would I start? If I did, thats all I'd be doing...

[pru]

I miss out on so much fun here

[ray]

A big win for site owners faced with stuff like this (from Slashdot):

"In the case of Blockowicz v. Williams, The US Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals refused to force Ripoff Report to remove allegedly defamatory comments posted by a user. The Ripoff Report has a well-publicized no-takedown policy, even if the author wants to remove his/her post, so the Ripoff Report refused. The Blockowiczs then claimed that the Ripoff Report violated FRCP 65(d) because the Ripoff Report was 'in active concert or participation' with the initial posters by refusing the injunction's removal order. The district court (and the Court of Appeals) disagreed with the Blockowiczs. Absent the 'active concert or participation,' the website was outside the court's control. Ripoff Report has released a statement concerning this case: 'In keeping with our core mission of protecting speech to the fullest extent of the law, we decided that it was not just our right but also our duty to ask questions and dig deeper before we could comply with such an order. Other sites claim they support free speech, but when the going gets rough, they will usually protect their bottom line rather than the Constitutional rights and freedoms this country was founded upon. Unlike other sites, even when the speech involved is harsh or negative and even if our position sometimes generates negative press for us, we think that the First Amendment requires us to put our principles before our pocketbook and fight against censorship.'"

So basically if someone posts a defamatory statement on my site about you then don't threaten legal action against me as a means to have it removed.

[the lurkist]

One person's shit talking slag is another persons first amendment right. I love this country.

"I'm proud to be an American, where at least I know I'm free (to shit talk)...."

[the lurkist]

And I also love your BBS. Thanks dude.

[ynp1]

Even I have been threatened with a lawsuit (slander???? I didn't even say anything, or write anything bad about the person) on this site in the past by somebody that might supprise you (or not)... I am not going to say who, but it was not Joe. I just told them "good luck".

[bcombs]

Don't get comfy ynp1, my lawyer is still "looking into it". Sometimes your momma jokes cut deeper than you think.

[ray]

Even I have been threatened with a lawsuit (slander???? I didn't even say anything, or write anything bad about the person) on this site in the past by somebody that might supprise you (or not)... I am not going to say who, but it was not Joe. I just told them "good luck".

This case doesn't defend the slanderer. It defends the owner of the website on which the defamatory comment was posted. You can still be sued and lose against someone who you flamed. The site owner is just not part of the equation and can't be sued or forced to remove the comments.

[ynp1]

Yeah I understand that.

[tbwilsonky]

oh, internets slander/defamation. how i'd love to #@!#* on your stupid @#$* @#$() in front of all your #$*@* ass #$*@ #%$$( friends and their $*#$()#$ ass#$*@#( buddies in #*@#$( City, @!.

j/k. this restraining order wont let me go within 150 yards of #*@#$( City, @!.