posted on March 14, 2001 03:00:07 PM new
save you from law suits, here's an interesting tidbit in today's Atlanta Journal Constitution.
Doctor wins libel suit over message on Internet
A doctor from Emory University has successfully tracked down (after 8 months) an anonymous poster from a message board at Yahoo and won a libel suit for $675,000.
This sets a precedence for chat boards, message boards, etc. The guy used different ID's to post his messages about this doctor and was caught, tried in federal court and fined that amount.
It doesn't pay to libel people and it doesn't pay to try to cover up.
posted on March 14, 2001 03:03:26 PM new
Watchdog, you searched far and wide for that post on BidBay. It wasn't today's Atlanta paper, it was months ago.
If you're going to quote from another message board, at least change the dates!
Or better yet, go to the library and look up the archives for that edition. The date is on BidBay's post I'm sure. Not too hard to find.
posted on March 14, 2001 03:15:21 PM new
Watchdog,
Yes it was. I bought the paper that day specifically to read that front page article.
Very interesting how it took him 8 months to track the person down, because he was using different aliases - but he won - and that's important to know. It certainly does set a precedence doesn't it?
posted on March 14, 2001 03:21:12 PM new
to watchdog123
It was a civil suit... Not fined
And if the guy has nothing then the good
doc gets nothing,,,thats the way its works.
If I say you stink, well thats my opinion..
{just a example} I dont even know you...
Now if I said my doctor sucks, and he did indeed mess me up... guess what?? Not a thing he can do about it Also Ohio passing
a new law,,, unwanted spam.. 100.00 fine for each and everyone...And the state will track them down,,, Afew more votes and its in...
posted on March 14, 2001 03:27:29 PM new
Uh oh, Reo, did you happen to read the paper?
He was ordered to pay it and he did.
BTW, it was not that he said the good doc stinks, he posted "quotes" that the good doc never made. He libeled him and tried to ruin his professional standing in the community. Several times, he posted pretending he was the good doc.
I'm sure this case is in archives somewhere on the net.
Georgia has that spam law, but so far no one has been fined that I know of, however, it won't be long before they crack down. The law's been in effect for awhile.
posted on March 14, 2001 03:31:08 PM new
Another thought to go with this is message board owners can be sued along with the person for allowing posts like that. I read that somewhere not too long ago.
I think, however, the doctor failed to try to sue Yahoo. Or hasn't yet.
posted on March 14, 2001 03:31:29 PM new
mtnmama,
my bad didnt read about it... its a he said, he said deal... ok....But if it is a civil suit, and your good enough,,, you can hide assets..not pay a dime..
It wasn't a he said, he said case. They had proof and the guy confessed to doing it. It was in federal court, I believe and he was ordered to pay and he did. He confessed to several other internet crimes against the doc too. I wish I had saved the paper. I quoted directly from the story on the front page. and watchdog123 quoted my quote.
posted on March 14, 2001 04:13:10 PM new
everyone concerned about me:
I am not theatening my doctor. I have a wonderful doctor. This whole topic is basically comparing apples to oranges. I am not threatening anyone actually. I am just voicing my opinion, same as all of you. I think it mighty strange that catsrus123 was suspended for bashing me and then watchdog123 shows up and does the same. He/she has the spelling ability of a true bidbayer!!! Turnup????? allcat???hury????LOL
MEOW pft pft!!
>^,,^ ^,,^<
[ edited by allycatpft on Mar 14, 2001 04:17 PM ]
posted on March 14, 2001 04:35:21 PM new
Thanks kasmoon. I was just about to buy the archived article.
I see no where that the guy was threatening anyone. He was libeling him, which is different than threatening.
Libel means defamation in writing. Harming one's business, reputation, etc.
In essence, the article states:
"Following a two-day trial, a jury found on October 25th that by publishing the statements, Dr. Oppenheimer and a company that he operates were guilty of defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress."
and
"There's one big difference between defamatory speech in the online and offline worlds, however, said Professor Lidsky of the University of Florida. On the Internet, the ordinary person is a publisher and thus the possibility that a small fry can become a defamation defendant is magnified.
After all, if the Internet didn't exist, the defendant in the Graham case may have simply talked around a water cooler and no suit would have been brought, Mrs. Lidsky explained. The conversation would have been "beneath notice," she said. But on the Internet, people who engage in "water cooler gossip" must appreciate that there is a possibility that they could be subject to a lawsuit if they defame someone, she said."
I don't know who that person is, but this was a very interesting and true article. I may be wrong, but I don't see where it's disrupting the chatboard.
posted on March 14, 2001 05:33:01 PM new
Hmmm, Pat okay received your e-mail and I understand totally. Perhaps a change in the title of this thread would be more to everyone's liking.
posted on March 14, 2001 05:37:14 PM new
yeah yeah yeah yada yada blah blah
MEOW pft pft!!
>^,,^^,,^<
Moderator since this person was suspended, would you consider locking up this thread?
[ edited by allycatpft on Mar 14, 2001 06:11 PM ]
posted on March 14, 2001 07:17:29 PM new
Have a nice night Watchdog where ever you are! Thanks for bringing this topic to the front.
[ edited by mtnmama on Mar 14, 2001 08:19 PM ]
posted on March 14, 2001 08:35:48 PM new
watchdog123 & catrus123 ~ I am sure are the same person. I will say this again. This is why Bidbay looks bad, this type of posting. The post that Catrus123 posted and has since been deleted was the lowest I think anyone could go. It sickens me and I hope that GT finds out who this person is and calls them personally to ask them to stop.
posted on March 14, 2001 09:54:00 PM new
I just wish the states would do something about the companies that constantly 'SPAM' my mailbox with over two hundred pounds of unwanted junk mail each year. But then, the USPS is probably in on that by giving them discounted mailing rates and foisting the cost of that stuff into the other rate hikes they are constantly seeking.
posted on March 15, 2001 04:58:47 AM new
deichen I don't believe Mr. CEO cares unless it is about him. I can tell you though, the way the title on this thread reads.....that's exactly what they do over there...like the person listed would be the only one to look? And the spelling is sssso Bidbayish! I just never figured out the reasoning behind the post, did you?
Nor this one. I have slandered no one but then truth does hurt.
As I said before, it is like comparing apples to oranges.
MEOW pft pft!!
>^,,^^,,^<
didnt read about it... its a he said, he said deal... ok....But if it is a civil suit, and your good enough,,, you can hide assets..not pay a dime..