|
Post by illgrace on Nov 9, 2007 12:25:27 GMT
Board operators and many others' are wary of 'naming names'. This is NOT the problem many think it is.
If a group, say, Stormfront, have an 'open forum' , one is free to use and copy from it. Please understand, many groups see this as a way of 'spreading the word'.
The best tactic is the most obvious: question the poster if you have doubts or they dodge pertinent questions. For example " Why does your site link to hate-groups - ARE you a member of said hate group?". If they are, they will either not answer or try to move the tread onto another topic. Don't let them, keep pressing. Yes, I know from past experience ;D this will not make you popular with certain boards. However, the safety of the board is at risk, so phrase your inquires in polite but penetrating ways. There is not need to ask a poster personal questions about their PERSON, but it is fine to ask about their 'beliefs'. Do so. It is not 'illegal', it will not get the board in trouble. If the board refuses to let you question the person in a polite manner, question the board. After all, you need to know what kind of board you are on. Just on recent experience, no 'libel' suits have come down the pike at pagan forums that do this. As it is up to the person bringing the suit to bring the libel suit, few hate groups would care to stand up to that kind of examination. They are more likely to try and either hack particular people that are persistence, or try a Denial of Service attack or some such on the board itself.
Illgrace
|
|
|
Post by Boojum on Nov 9, 2007 13:08:44 GMT
It's also worth mentioning that while threats of libel action are incredibly common on the net, almost none of them are followed through. If you have your facts straight, this isn't something to fear.
At worst, they'll complain to your ISP. (So it is worth keeping any important data backed up offline, as a precaution).
|
|
|
Post by illgrace on Nov 9, 2007 14:31:37 GMT
I second, third and forth that ;D
Ilgrace
|
|
|
Post by Paul Mitchell on Nov 9, 2007 15:03:52 GMT
Hi there
do you have any records of occasions when people HAVE been sued for libel etc as a result of internet activity? I have seen this threat, and more often the fear of this threat, touted on several occasions, but am unable to robustly respond to it with some facts / figures
|
|
|
Post by illgrace on Nov 9, 2007 15:40:46 GMT
I could have sworn I just posted this, but it IS 7:30 in the morning here and I've not been to bed. There is a loop-hole law which U.K. firms have been using - I can't for the life of me remember it's name right now but maybe Boo can help. I will get back to you this (your) evening. In the meanwhile, while this doesn't address your question , it's got some very interesting reads in it: [HERE]Illgrace
|
|
|
Post by Boojum on Nov 9, 2007 16:16:21 GMT
Hi there do you have any records of occasions when people HAVE been sued for libel etc as a result of internet activity? I have seen this threat, and more often the fear of this threat, touted on several occasions, but am unable to robustly respond to it with some facts / figures The only famous case I know of is this one- www.guardian.co.uk/law/story/0,,1737445,00.html Which is a very different situation. That involved false accusations of being a Nazi and padeophilia, plus attacks on the guy's wife. I'm not fond of the British libel laws, but in this case I can see why the decision was made.
More common is the marvellous case of Something Awful versus the Ultimate Warrior
www.somethingawful.com/d/legal-threats/legal-threat-ultimate.php
(Warning! Contains serious amounts of Lulz!)
|
|