Welcome | View My Profile | Sign Out Publications Events Awards Classifieds Research Communities MediaPost Home About MediaPost Privacy/Terms Media Kit SitemapPublications Home News Online Media Daily Media Daily News Marketing Daily Mobile Marketing Daily Daily Feed> Email Daily Feed> Search Daily Feed> Video Daily Feed> Social Online Blogs Online Spin Email Insider Search Insider... [more]
Did you do a select all? You don't have to.
Did you know you can select what you want to copy by position the little pointer to just before the first character and then dragging or even using the arrow keys down to just after the last character?
I had to try copying and pasting for myself to see how hard it was include only the text of the story.
Not hard.
The tabloids are still making hay over the unmasking of the blogger who trashed model Liskula Cohen on the site Skanks in NYC. But that's hardly the only dispute to hit the courts about anonymous commenters.
Another case brewing in Chicago has caught the attention of the digital rights group Electronic Frontier Foundation, which just filed a motion asking a judge to quash a subpoena for the names of online commenters.
That case stems from a long-running controversy about Chicago's Wilson Yard development project. Some residents who oppose the project took their complaints online, where they created blogs like "Uptown Update" and the now-defunct "What the Helen" (which discussed the 2007 campaign of Chicago Alderman Helen Shiller) -- both of which were hosted by Google. The neighborhood association Buena Park Neighbors also linked to a message board that hosted anonymous comments about many matters, including the project.
Last December, a group of opponents sued to block the project. The developer responded by attempting to subpoena the names and other identifying information of the Web commenters.
The developer's lawyer, Tom Johnson, says he's trying to learn whether any commenters are also parties to the lawsuit. If so, he says, "their comments could be used effectively on cross-examination at any preliminary injunction hearing."
But the EFF argues that the subpoenas are nothing more than "improper threats to out anonymous critics of their development project."
EFF attorney Matt Zimmerman says the developer is targeting people "solely based on their critical speech and nothing else." He adds that the developer has no reason to think that any of the Web commenters are involved in the lawsuit. "This would be like going into the neighborhood that is affected by this development project and subpoenaing every resident because -- who knows? -- maybe the resident might have information relevant to their case," he says.
Zimmerman adds that the developer's lawyer could simply ask the people who are suing whether they have ever made prior statements about the case, as opposed to subpoenaing the names of commenters.
Besides, he says, any prior remarks by the plaintiffs are irrelevant given that a court already ruled that the project's opponents waited too long to sue. In May, Judge Mary Rochford of the Cook County Circuit Court dismissed the lawsuit on the grounds that the plaintiffs knew about the development since 2001 but didn't bring suit until 2008. Last month, the opponents filed amended papers, but that action seems likely to also be thrown out for the same reason.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by divvie
over 16 years ago
Posts: 456
Member since: Mar 2007
You do have to be careful when litigating against the person/company you are blogging about.
I am not a lawyer but I do know people who have been involved in lawsuits against developers and they were advised to write attorney client privelage after each email between the other litigants in case the emails were subpoenaed.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by manhattanfox
over 16 years ago
Posts: 1275
Member since: Sep 2007
As I understand it (note qualifyer) there is a fine line -- but libelous writing to two or more persons about a third party -- is libel. that said -- if you are expressing your opinion -- 1st amendment. The key is to use qulaifiers such as, in my opinion, and it seems... I like to use words such as "he is a f*&^. Because if you say He is a thief... it is worse. You can say, he semms to be a thief.... which shows feeling rather than a fact....
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by alex01
about 16 years ago
Posts: 1
Member since: Dec 2009
This is a very interesting site. Information about all types of legal matter and the way those matters are handled is present here. You would not like to take a chance in a legal matter to handle yourself if it involves a lot of money or if it is really serious.
=============================
alex
find attorneys
Did you do a select all? You don't have to.
Did you know you can select what you want to copy by position the little pointer to just before the first character and then dragging or even using the arrow keys down to just after the last character?
I had to try copying and pasting for myself to see how hard it was include only the text of the story.
Not hard.
http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=112173
The tabloids are still making hay over the unmasking of the blogger who trashed model Liskula Cohen on the site Skanks in NYC. But that's hardly the only dispute to hit the courts about anonymous commenters.
Another case brewing in Chicago has caught the attention of the digital rights group Electronic Frontier Foundation, which just filed a motion asking a judge to quash a subpoena for the names of online commenters.
That case stems from a long-running controversy about Chicago's Wilson Yard development project. Some residents who oppose the project took their complaints online, where they created blogs like "Uptown Update" and the now-defunct "What the Helen" (which discussed the 2007 campaign of Chicago Alderman Helen Shiller) -- both of which were hosted by Google. The neighborhood association Buena Park Neighbors also linked to a message board that hosted anonymous comments about many matters, including the project.
Last December, a group of opponents sued to block the project. The developer responded by attempting to subpoena the names and other identifying information of the Web commenters.
The developer's lawyer, Tom Johnson, says he's trying to learn whether any commenters are also parties to the lawsuit. If so, he says, "their comments could be used effectively on cross-examination at any preliminary injunction hearing."
But the EFF argues that the subpoenas are nothing more than "improper threats to out anonymous critics of their development project."
EFF attorney Matt Zimmerman says the developer is targeting people "solely based on their critical speech and nothing else." He adds that the developer has no reason to think that any of the Web commenters are involved in the lawsuit. "This would be like going into the neighborhood that is affected by this development project and subpoenaing every resident because -- who knows? -- maybe the resident might have information relevant to their case," he says.
Zimmerman adds that the developer's lawyer could simply ask the people who are suing whether they have ever made prior statements about the case, as opposed to subpoenaing the names of commenters.
Besides, he says, any prior remarks by the plaintiffs are irrelevant given that a court already ruled that the project's opponents waited too long to sue. In May, Judge Mary Rochford of the Cook County Circuit Court dismissed the lawsuit on the grounds that the plaintiffs knew about the development since 2001 but didn't bring suit until 2008. Last month, the opponents filed amended papers, but that action seems likely to also be thrown out for the same reason.
You do have to be careful when litigating against the person/company you are blogging about.
I am not a lawyer but I do know people who have been involved in lawsuits against developers and they were advised to write attorney client privelage after each email between the other litigants in case the emails were subpoenaed.
As I understand it (note qualifyer) there is a fine line -- but libelous writing to two or more persons about a third party -- is libel. that said -- if you are expressing your opinion -- 1st amendment. The key is to use qulaifiers such as, in my opinion, and it seems... I like to use words such as "he is a f*&^. Because if you say He is a thief... it is worse. You can say, he semms to be a thief.... which shows feeling rather than a fact....
This is a very interesting site. Information about all types of legal matter and the way those matters are handled is present here. You would not like to take a chance in a legal matter to handle yourself if it involves a lot of money or if it is really serious.
=============================
alex
find attorneys
... or even if it's kind of funny.