Getting sued for what you say on a messageboard

[PenguinKing]

Hmmm... doesn't that mean that in the case of an individual defendant versus a corporation, the individual will always lose? After all, it's dead simple for anyone with a big enough legal budget to confuse any issue with misinformation and technicalities to the point where nothing conclusive can be shown either way - and in that case, doesn't the fact that the burden of proof falls upon the defendant mean said defendant loses "by default", so to speak?

- Sir Bob.

P.S. Nih!

 

[el Voz]

All in all something is fishy. How did the guy get the judgement but not the notice about the court date?

How did he get found at all?

I know a little about xybernaught, and they have developed a computer that fits a niche. The computer is great for those engineers who need to access data at remote locations, i.e. DOT tunnel/bridge inspector.

 

[Storm Raven]

Hmmm... doesn't that mean that in the case of an individual defendant versus a corporation, the individual will always lose? After all, it's dead simple for anyone with a big enough legal budget to confuse any issue with misinformation and technicalities to the point where nothing conclusive can be shown either way - and in that case, doesn't the fact that the burden of proof falls upon the defendant mean said defendant loses "by default", so to speak?

Not necessarily. There are lots of negative things that can be said that do not meet the definition of slander or libel. The plaintiff has to make the case that the statements at issue, if true, do amount to slander or libel.

If Billy states "I think that Bob is a big poo poo head" then that is not slanderous or libelous, because it is an opinion.

If Billy states (for example purposes only) "Bob is a convicted felon who engages in unnatural acts with farm animals" then that is slanderous or libelous if untrue because it is couched as a statement of fact.

Now, if the Bob comes in to court and proves that Billy did say the second phrase in a forum likely to impinge upon Bob's reputation (stating this in a limited forum is neither slander or libelous because it cannot damage Bob's reputation), then Billy could introduce evidence that his statement was true, but he doesn't have to do that until then.

 

[Mort]

I’ll follow Storm Raven’s lead and say that the following is not legal advice of any kind and is solely being offered for informative purposes.

JPL, if you expect the courtroom to be anything like they tell you in law school, you’re in for a rude shock.

Notice by certified mail is allowed in Illinois (then again Illinois is incredibly creditor friendly).

In my experience, default judgements happen all the time and while in theory they are easier to overturn, in practice they rarely are (overturned).

Remember in the US you can sue someone for almost anything, whether you’ll win (or it will even get to court) is another matter entirely, but strange judgements like the one posted can and do occur (and stick).

Not exactly a D&D subject, huh?

 

[Warchild]

Remember in the US you can sue someone for almost anything, whether you’ll win (or it will even get to court) is another matter entirely, but strange judgements like the one posted can and do occur (and stick).

Not exactly a D&D subject, huh?

No, but i would like to use all sorts of medevil weaponry on people/companies like this.
Those pushing around others because its easy or legal to do so, need to die. One more piece of evidence that this country isn't the land of the free and certaintly not a lot of Brave. You don't have the right to speak freely. Well....you do, but only if you're rich.
........uhhhh......Damn Aristocrats.....thats kinda D&D'ish.......ain't it?

 

[JPL]

Mr. Raven, thank you for clarifying. I mostly work felony prosecution, so I probably shouldn't've chimed in.

Mr. Mort --- yeah, I figured as much.

The only point that I want to emphasize for the non-lawyers on the boards is that this fella lost his case because he didn't show up at court, period.

This judgment had nothing to do with the actually strength of the plaintiff's claim. Again, from the facts presented in this article, I don't see a libel case...but there are obviously more experienced folks than me, even on this board, and they might disagree.

Actually, it sounds to me like our defendant was served and chose to ignore it. And that is ALWAYS a mistake.

While it is certainly possible to get into legal trouble on the basis of a post --- especially one which was made with malicious intent and which presents as fact statements which the writer knows to be false --- the facts of this case should not be construed as guidelines as to what sort of language will get you into trouble on the web.

But I'm not a lawyer for another four months.

 

[adndgamer]

What a crock of **** this all is! *shakes head and mutters something about moving out of the country*

I'm liking America less and less... with the MPAA and RIAA cases, and now crap like this...

 

[Wolfspider]

the MPAA and RIAA cases

Hmmm? Have I missed something? Do tell!

 

[ColonelHardisson]

What a crock of **** this all is! *shakes head and mutters something about moving out of the country*

I'm liking America less and less... with the MPAA and RIAA cases, and now crap like this...

Relax. These kind of things are always going to happen; it's the system at work. Someone tries it, and maybe for a while some succeed, until people come to their senses and realize it's dumb and it gets either legislated away or gets changed/interpreted in the courts to a much more sensible form. This country really is what we make of it. We really do end up with what we deserve. Voter apathy in particular is a good reason for this. Instead of getting mad and leaving, we should get mad and try to change things for the better. There is a system in place for just such a thing to happen. The problem we have in America is that the vast majority of us are too lazy to even do something as simple as vote (this isn't a knock at you, adndgamer; just an observation in general). The way I like to think of it is like this: it's our house. We aren't renting. If something is screwed up, it's our personal responsibility to fix it - no one else is gonna do it for us.

 

[adndgamer]

Hmmm? Have I missed something? Do tell!

I should have mentioned the SSSCA too. Here's a link for that:

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/09/08/0238200

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/02/27/1617221&mode=thread

The MPAA and RIAA cases.. well, the RIAA cases are about them wanting to put copy protection on CDs, so they won't play on your computer, and you won't be able to rip them into mp3s (even for legitimate use). This is stupid, because it would be possible still to copy these cds (use audio out to play through an audio system and back into your computer to copy from the audio system, IIRC).

Here are some links:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...ogy_stops_copies__but_it_starts_a_controversy

http://www.wired.com/news/conflict/0,2100,47552,00.html


And the MPAA stuff.. well, the MPAA is suing 2600 (a "hacker" magazine) over linking to dvd descrambling related pages.

This link is good, and contains more links also:

http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,37501,00.html

Oh, and on a related note...another one dealing with 2600, but this time with Ford. Check this out: http://www.FordReallySucks.com/more_info.html

*sigh* So many stupid people. I wholeheartedly believe in freedom of speech, and these people are trying so hard to limit it.