Tom, I think it breaks down like this: Celeb A is mentioned in a post We talk about Celeb A Celeb A's lawyers complain - with justification with regard to libel laws We cannot now talk about Celeb A with complete irresponsibility/freedom, without risk Celeb B is mentioned in a post We talk about Celeb B ... Until Celeb B's lawyers contact the site to complain (assuming they have grounds to do so), we have a little more freedom to discuss whatever hypothetical crimes Celeb B may have committed. There's the principles of freedom of speech, and then it boils down to practicalities. Once a lawyer is involved, the mods have to weigh up the risks.
But if celeb b's lawyers are also celeb a's and they show that the forum has been warned about libellous comments previously? The problem I see is that this is an open forum viewable by anyone, therefore we need to be more restrained than a closed forum viewable only by members. Tom changed his user details (I'm guessing) so that if he posted anything controversial it couldn't bite him on the arse. I'm all for freedom of speech however if it can lead to lawyers suing individuals is it worth it. I work on the basis would I say it to their face if yes I post if not nope. When you post you are actually acting as a publisher and are consequently subject to the same laws as any newspaper.
There are some forums with a password protected section that can only be accessed by members with the password. Something like that could be appropriate on here? Obviously nothing useful would actually get posted there but it would provide some degree of protection?
i thought it was about Jeraldene adamsonsonson . after i won an unfair dismissal case 3 years ago i contacted a lawyer about pursuing a deformation of character case, some pretty serious allegations where made by previous employer. i was advised not to pursue due to costs it appears people can say what they like if they think you cant afford to defend your self. so i used the compo to start my own business and made his a target. about 75% of my custom came from that garage. there is deffo more than one way to skin a cat.
Yep, it was about GA... I thought it may be an opportunity for some constructive banter; especially considering all the ex mob on here. I can't be arsed now... Reminds me of the old joke about not being able to tell your boss that he's a cnut; but thinking he is one is different; then you tell every one what you're thinking... I Understand the need for caution, but think it may have gone too far in this case. I liked ping ping's post, it made me laugh, and it should have been seen as nothing more than that... My post was edited too, not sure what that achieved...
I assumed it was referring to the arrest of Gerry Adams as well. I've resisted posting before as my loathing of that man cannot be described on this forum.
I take back everything I said about the Mallett boy, I didn't realise it was gonna start a war. And anyway, I meant Christopher Biggi......
anyway no charges have been made claims have been made that the past should remain in the past so I take it all charges against members of the armed services will now be dropped as well...........
The one I saw today did have a beard. Soon we shall be able to call certain individuals dirty nonces with gay abandon and no fear of retribution. Or not.
This is a very confusing thread. I know no longer know if we are talking about someone who painted the Queen, or just someone who wanted to blow her up. Or both.
