The Legality of Naming & Shaming on these Boards?

asea

Does anyone know of the legal status of someone that names & shames & talks of their experiences with a company on here? If they were honest in their postings would a poster have anything to be worried about? Could a particularly litiguous (excuse the spelling if it's wrong!) sue a person for defamation or libel? Just curious, like!

:cool:

dmg24

If someone names and shames on here then they should be absolutely sure of their facts, and have evidence to back up the claims. You can't be sued for telling the truth.

If someone was found to be giving false information, then no reason why they shouldn't/ couldn't be sued.

The only point I am unsure of is who would be liable. Would it be Martin's company, or the individual poster? If it is the poster, would the site owners be obliged to give the details of the poster?

Am sure this is covered somewhere else, just can't think where!

crazy_guy

MSE would be liable as it would be deemed to having "published" the defamatory statement on the website - and a publisher is potentially liable for publishing a defamatory statement:money:

Butlers1982

As far as Im aware, its the site rather than the the individial.

If you look i believe certain companies have stopped voucher codes being put on here

wifeforlife

I think it's the website that can be sued.

Was there a case recently of some childcare expert (or not) sueing a parenting forum as people where saying she was !!!!!!

Cate

Sagaris

Yes - I think that was Gina Ford, with the 'Contented Little Baby Book' or something - I think it's all been sorted out now though.

vetfred

Libel laws are quite complex and differ (obviously) throughout the world. One example of an individual defamation suit saw a Yahoo! group poster slamming the character of another and it led to a £10,000 individual fine. Demon (the ISP) had to pay out £200,000 for stuff posted in one of their newsgroups a few years back.

My thoughts are that if someone posts an experience saying they paid £x for a product, the product didn't work and the company wouldn't exchange etc (and it's factual) then that's their right and their claims can be proven and are not going down the more wild roads of saying things like "X company are thiefs" or "x is a conman". People are free to express experiences factually and have opinions but not to state as fact or to imply as fact what are actually false or unprovable claims - after all, one poor experience of a company does not mean the company are thiefs in the eyes of the law, it just means you've had a problem.

dmg24

Just be looking at the t & c's (I must get a life!). Though the site owners would be the ones to be sued, they could then sue the author!

You agree to indemnify, defend and hold harmless us, our directors, officers, employees and licensors from and against any claim, liability, cost, damage or loss we may incur (including reasonable legal fees) as a result of any material that you post or transmit on our communication forums or via our comms systems, any actions you take which disrupt access to and/or the functioning of our site or any breach by you of your obligations under these Terms.

Alfie_E

In general, it goes something like the following.

The site and Martin would only potentially be liable if a post wasn’t removed after they have been asked to remove it. The site and Martin are not publishers, because they do not have any involvement with the material before it appears on the site. The examples of companies paying out have been when they’ve tried to stand their ground and not remove information. If I remember the Demon case, they were arguing about the nature of newsgroups. Posts in newsgroups are distributed in a similar manner to files in peer-to-peer file sharing. Removing posts from one newsgroup server was argued to be futile and pointless as the posts were also replicated on servers all over the world.

The poster is liable for whatever he or she posts. The site might willingly provide a poster’s IP address, or it might take a court order to get it. Your ISP, in turn, might willingly provide the account holder’s name and address, or it might take a court order to get it. If the account holder knows who was using the computer at the time, he or she might willingly provide the name and address of the poster, or it might take a court order to get it. If the account holder does not provide the required information there’s a risk that he or she could be found liable in court. The court would have to decide whether it’s likely that they don’t know or whether it’s likely they were the poster.

Even if a poster is completely honest and accurate in there post, there is always the potential risk that a court could find against them.