Liable online

[GeneChing]

I found this case interesting. I'd love to hear more about it, along with any similar cases you all might stumble upon.


Prosecutor goes after man for his online rants (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/12/05/MNLQ14I5JL.DTL&hw=liable+online&sn=001&sc=1000)
Nicholas Riccardi, Los Angeles Times
Friday, December 5, 2008

(12-05) 04:00 PST Fort Collins, Colo. -- Locked in a visitation dispute with his ex-girlfriend over their young daughter, J.P. Weichel wanted to vent, court records show.

Weichel, 40, allegedly posted comments about the woman on the Craigslist "Rants and Raves" forum, accusing her of child abuse and of welfare fraud, and making crude comments about her sex life. The woman said the postings were defamatory. But, unlike the vast majority of libel cases, which are tried in civil court, local authorities have taken the unusual step of charging Weichel with the crime of defaming his ex-girlfriend online.

Colorado is one of a dwindling number of states with a criminal law against libel. The rarely used statute dates to the 19th century.

But Larimer County District Attorney Larry Abrahamson said Colorado's statute applied precisely to what Weichel did.

Weichel could not be reached for comment. His attorney, Michael Liggett, has a policy of not speaking with reporters, according to an assistant at his law office.

Several other lawyers said the case should be handled in civil court. Bringing the government into the dispute infringes on free speech, they said.

"Being a jerk isn't necessarily grounds for felony prosecution," said Mark Silverstein, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado.

Gregory Lisby, a communications professor at Georgia State University, has tracked criminal libel prosecutions. He said the states that retain such laws - there are 17, according to free-speech groups - have failed to update legislation that stems from 15th century English common law.

Criminal libel prosecutions are "a sledgehammer when a scalpel would do the same trick," Lisby said.

His research has shown the number of criminal libel cases dropping, but the Internet could reverse that, Lisby said. People don't realize that scathing postings or e-mails can make them liable for defamation charges.

"More and more people view the online world as a free-rant place," Lisby said. "They think it's par for the course, but they're setting themselves up for lawsuits" or prosecution.

In civil libel cases, truth is the best defense, and the dead cannot be libeled. But Colorado's criminal statute holds that it is illegal to "blacken the memory of one who is dead." Truth is not a defense in those cases, nor in ones that "expose the natural defects of one who is alive."

According to police and court records, Weichel's postings were purely personal. Weichel's ex-girlfriend contacted police in Loveland last December about anonymous postings.

According to a police report, the postings alleged that she abused her child and concealed it from social workers, that she committed welfare fraud and that she worked for a "crooked" Fort Collins lawyer whom she sexually serviced. The postings were laced with crude references to her body. The woman told police that people who knew her read them and tried to defend her in online comments.

Police traced the postings to a computer to which Weichel had access. In August, Loveland police questioned Weichel at his workplace about the postings.

"Weichel stated he was 'just venting,' " according to an affidavit for an arrest warrant filed in court here.

Abrahamson's office filed two criminal libel charges against Weichel on Oct. 21.

[Reverend Tap]

Wow. Never knew we had that law on the books. In my own town, no less.

Well, one hopes for the possibility of this being used as a test case to bring the law up to date, though personally I won't be holding my breath.

[Lucas]

can i form lawsuits against trolls?

[David Jamieson]

More proof of how nasty women can get and how nitpicky lawyers can be.

[TenTigers]

oh....I thought this was about another RateMyCamelToe site


darn!:(

[1bad65]

Nothing nitpicky about it. Accusing someone of child abuse and welfare fraud are serious allegations. I believe those are actually felonies. If I were her, and his assertions are bs, I'd go after him in civil court and in criminal court.

[Drake]

It's where you cross the line between being insulting and rude and making allegations of criminal misconduct in a public forum.

[Judge Pen]

The law (or the lawyers) aren't more nitpicky now. It's just the methods of publishing the libel have changed. Now it is odd to have a criminal law for libel, I didn't know that was out there (but I don't practice in Colorado either).

For whatever reason, people think that the internet insulates them from taking responsibility for their words.

[Lucas]

The law (or the lawyers) aren't more nitpicky now. It's just the methods of publishing the libel have changed. Now it is odd to have a criminal law for libel, I didn't know that was out there (but I don't practice in Colorado either).

For whatever reason, people think that the internet insulates them from taking responsibility for their words.

im holding you responsible for this !

:mad:

[SPJ]

people is always searching for info or links or references on the net.

as far as ranting in a forum well it is just a rant.

--

:confused:

[BentMonk]

Some people think because they're online and using an alias, that what they say can't come back and bite them in the ass. By now everyone should know that there is no such thing as anonymity or privacy, especially online. The guy should have known better. If his allegations are true, he should have used them properly in conjunction with the court system to get custody of his child. If his allegations are BS he has made him self look like a fool and probably done serious damage to his chances of getting custody of his child. The rule about thinking before you speak has been around a lot longer than the net.

[TenTigers]

Let me take this time to mention that my ex, is a bright,charming woman, who shows no signs of mental instability, bi-polar disorder, borderline personality disorder, is NOT a coniving,calculating, manipulating bit*h,and she is not trying to start her own cult, by surrounding herself with 'minions' of which she attempts to have control over their lives by acting as their "life coach."
Furthermore, she is NOT a pathological liar, and certainly NOT lost in her own distorted view of herslf and the world she creates around her.
I would also like to state that I wish her only the best, and hold no animosity or grudges against her.

[BentMonk]

:D
Let me take the time to mention that my ex, is a bright,charming woman, who shows no signs of mental instability, bi-polar disorder, borderline personality disorder, is NOT a coniving,calculating, manipulating bit*h,and she is not trying to start her own cult, by surrounding herself with 'minions' of which she attempts to have control over their lives by acting as their "life coach."
Furthermore, she is NOT a pathological liar, and certainly NOT lost in her own distorted view of herslf and the world she creates around her.
I would also like to state that I wish her only the best, and hold no animosity or grudges against her.

Way to CYA there TT...nice. lol

[mickey]

Greetings,

What about idea theft? What if you posted something on an internet forum and it was used in a movie?


mickey

[uki]

For whatever reason, people think that the internet insulates them from taking responsibility for their words.i anticipate the feds knocking on my door to arrest me on charges relating to my stances on certain issues of american foreign policy, along with my general belief structure... any law can be enacted to make anything one does illegal, so it is no suprise to me that these sorts of things will be more frequent in the future... yet relating to this particular incident involving the accuasations of child abuse, i stand behind the an investigation into them... harming children and hiding the fact is beyond contempt... but stating personal beliefs that are at war with political correctedness is another issue. all i can say is... bring it on, i understand full well the repurcussions that may stem for my beliefs and i take full responsibility for speaking and expressing my views and beliefs... it takes courage to stand up for what one believes in...

[lkfmdc]

Does this mean Gene is suing me over all the Shaolin Taco (tm) and Shaolin Pole Dancing (tm) threads? :eek:

[SimonM]

Greetings,

What about idea theft? What if you posted something on an internet forum and it was used in a movie?


mickey


The burden would fall on you to prove it.

That is one reason why, my friend, I will not be posting ANY previews of my fiction writing to the forum.

In fact I'm giving it to NOBODY who isn't family until I have a dated manuscript and an agent.


i anticipate the feds knocking on my door to arrest me on charges relating to my stances on certain issues of american foreign policy.

ROTFL!

How's that kool aide Uki?

[Mano Mano]

Does this mean Gene is suing me over all the Shaolin Taco (tm) and Shaolin Pole Dancing (tm) threads? :eek: That depends, were you in one of the 17 states that still retain the law when you posted.
I love archaic & out of date laws, did you know it’s still against the law in England not to practice archery on a Sunday, yet if you did technically you could be charged with being in possession of an offensive or dangerous weapon if out in public place.

[SimonM]

Well if you don't keep up your skill with the stout English Longbow how will you prevent an invasion of the dastardly normans?!?!

[uki]

How's that kool aide Uki?i dunno, but the seasonal brew the mad elf is quite the riot. :D

[lkfmdc]

25 Crazy Laws From Around the World

http://www.socyberty.com/Law/25-Crazy-Laws-From-Around-the-World.38998

We have all heard of some pretty silly laws. Here are twenty-five of the craziest I have ever heard of. (With the exception of #25, I think it is an unwritten law everywhere...)

In Bozeman, Montana, a law prohibits all sexual activity from the front yard of a home after sundown.
In Salt Lake County, Utah, it's illegal to walk down the street carrying a violin in a paper bag.
In San Francisco, it's illegal to pile horse manure more than six feet high on a street corner.
In Devon, Texas, it is against the law to make furniture while you are nude.
In Oklahoma, you can be arrested for making ugly faces at a dog. ( What if it's an ugly dog...?)
In California it is illegal for a vehicle without a driver to exceed 60 miles per hour.
In Florida men seen publicly in any kind of strapless gown can be fined.
In South Carolina it is legal to beat your wife on the court house steps on Sundays.
In Tennessee, you are breaking the law if you drive while sleeping...
In New York, the penalty for jumping off a building is: Death. ( Go figure...)
In Danville, Pennsylvania, all fire hydrants must be checked one hour before all fires.
In Pennsylvania, it's against the law to tie a dollar bill on a string on the ground and pull it away when someone tries to pick it up.
In New York City, it's illegal for a restaurant to call a sandwich a "corned beef sandwich" if it's made with white bread and mayonnaise. ( I agree 100%! )
In California it is illegal to set a mouse trap without a hunting license.
In France, it is against the law to sell an "E.T" doll. They have a law forbidding the sale of dolls that do not have human faces.
In Athens, Greece, a driver's license can be taken away if the driver is thought to be either "poorly dressed" or "unbathed"
In Calgary Alberta, there is still a by-law that requires businesses within the city to provide rails for tying up horses.
In Wilbur, Washington, it is illegal to ride an ugly horse. ( but can you make faces at him? )
In Louisiana, biting someone with your natural teeth is considered "simple assault," but biting someone with your dentures is "aggravated assault."
In the state of Washington, it is illegal to have sex with a virgin under any circumstances. (Including the wedding night.)
In Switzerland, it is illegal for a man to relieve himself while standing up after 10pm.( even with the light on? )
In Florida, it is illegal to **** in a public place after 6 P.M. on Thursdays.
In Massachusetts, it is illegal to go to bed without first having a bath. (However, another law prohibits bathing on Sunday)
In Jidda, Saudi Arabia, women were banned from using hotel swimming pools in 1979.
In Samoa, it's a crime to forget your own wife's birthday...

[sanjuro_ronin]

25 Crazy Laws From Around the World

http://www.socyberty.com/Law/25-Crazy-Laws-From-Around-the-World.38998

We have all heard of some pretty silly laws. Here are twenty-five of the craziest I have ever heard of. (With the exception of #25, I think it is an unwritten law everywhere...)

In Bozeman, Montana, a law prohibits all sexual activity from the front yard of a home after sundown.
In Salt Lake County, Utah, it's illegal to walk down the street carrying a violin in a paper bag.
In San Francisco, it's illegal to pile horse manure more than six feet high on a street corner.
In Devon, Texas, it is against the law to make furniture while you are nude.
In Oklahoma, you can be arrested for making ugly faces at a dog. ( What if it's an ugly dog...?)
In California it is illegal for a vehicle without a driver to exceed 60 miles per hour.
In Florida men seen publicly in any kind of strapless gown can be fined.
In South Carolina it is legal to beat your wife on the court house steps on Sundays.
In Tennessee, you are breaking the law if you drive while sleeping...
In New York, the penalty for jumping off a building is: Death. ( Go figure...)
In Danville, Pennsylvania, all fire hydrants must be checked one hour before all fires.
In Pennsylvania, it's against the law to tie a dollar bill on a string on the ground and pull it away when someone tries to pick it up.
In New York City, it's illegal for a restaurant to call a sandwich a "corned beef sandwich" if it's made with white bread and mayonnaise. ( I agree 100%! )
In California it is illegal to set a mouse trap without a hunting license.
In France, it is against the law to sell an "E.T" doll. They have a law forbidding the sale of dolls that do not have human faces.
In Athens, Greece, a driver's license can be taken away if the driver is thought to be either "poorly dressed" or "unbathed"
In Calgary Alberta, there is still a by-law that requires businesses within the city to provide rails for tying up horses.
In Wilbur, Washington, it is illegal to ride an ugly horse. ( but can you make faces at him? )
In Louisiana, biting someone with your natural teeth is considered "simple assault," but biting someone with your dentures is "aggravated assault."
In the state of Washington, it is illegal to have sex with a virgin under any circumstances. (Including the wedding night.)
In Switzerland, it is illegal for a man to relieve himself while standing up after 10pm.( even with the light on? )
In Florida, it is illegal to **** in a public place after 6 P.M. on Thursdays.
In Massachusetts, it is illegal to go to bed without first having a bath. (However, another law prohibits bathing on Sunday)
In Jidda, Saudi Arabia, women were banned from using hotel swimming pools in 1979.
In Samoa, it's a crime to forget your own wife's birthday...

Crazy ??
Some of that is just good common sense !!

[SimonM]

Others would be counteracted by more recent laws if anyone attempted to apply their statutes.

[IronWeasel]

25 Crazy Laws From Around the World

In Bozeman, Montana, a law prohibits all sexual activity from the front yard of a home after sundown. ...



Yikes!!

A few of us could have been arrested on the ski trip last year. :eek:

[Mr Punch]

Nothing nitpicky about it. Accusing someone of child abuse and welfare fraud are serious allegations. I believe those are actually felonies. If I were her, and his assertions are bs, I'd go after him in civil court and in criminal court.Quite.

[Goes away and stabs himself in the eye for agreeing with 1bad...]

[uki]

my brother and i got banned from austria for 10 years after we barricaded ourselves in an abandon building and stacked cobblestones in the window incase we needed to toss them at the 100 or so riot police that surrounded the place... we lasted 6 hours until the alcohol wore off... it was us, a few locals, a few bosnian refugees, and one boston chick who was on a university trip. we were allowed back in this year... boy how time does fly.

so i guess stacking bricks and stones in the windows to throw at police is against the law in austria. :D

[SimonM]

Squatting
B&E
Assaulting an Officer
Resisting Arrest

Yeah. You are lucky you didn't get jail time. You know, assuming this really happened. Not an assumption I would make considering you are a Troll.

[uki]

Yeah. You are lucky you didn't get jail time. You know, assuming this really happened. Not an assumption I would make considering you are a Troll.call me a troll, but i ain't no liar... i spent two weeks in depo and had my DNA swabbed before they flew us back to the states and then had the gall to send us a bill for it... which of course we never paid.

[David Jamieson]

i anticipate the feds knocking on my door to arrest me on charges relating to my stances on certain issues of american foreign policy, along with my general belief structure... any law can be enacted to make anything one does illegal, so it is no suprise to me that these sorts of things will be more frequent in the future... yet relating to this particular incident involving the accuasations of child abuse, i stand behind the an investigation into them... harming children and hiding the fact is beyond contempt... but stating personal beliefs that are at war with political correctedness is another issue. all i can say is... bring it on, i understand full well the repurcussions that may stem for my beliefs and i take full responsibility for speaking and expressing my views and beliefs... it takes courage to stand up for what one believes in...

lol. dude, you are a ****ant living in the woods, getting high and babbling on a forum.

hardly what would be worth expending dollar one concerning your political views which are more than anything tin foil hat wearing rants coming from an ignorant perspective.

just saying. lol. you wish you were somehow important, but unfortunately for you you can't bring yourself out of you drugged out stupor long enough to grasp any reality that is worthwhile.

now go back into your box of hate and get all riled up about police or something. :p

[uki]

lol. dude, you are a ****ant living in the woods, getting high and babbling on a forum.kills the time i must say.


hardly what would be worth expending dollar one concerning your political views which are more than anything tin foil hat wearing rants coming from an ignorant perspective.and thats their downfall... under-estimation.


just saying. lol. you wish you were somehow important, but unfortunately for you you can't bring yourself out of you drugged out stupor long enough to grasp any reality that is worthwhile.yeah true, i am too busy working, chopping firewood, and building my martial arts training playground to be concerned with reality.


now go back into your box of hate and get all riled up about police or something.just waiting patiently for something worthwhile to rant about... til then i am content just being who i am.

ya'll are really quite the comic relief. :D

[Lucas]

i wonder how many people are alive that can even fully draw an english longbow.

you have to start practicing with those as a kid. some interesting studies done on the bones of former english longbowmen.

i remember reading something that drawing a traditional english longbow was akin to lifting a full grown man over your head with basically one arm.

[SimonM]

That's a bit of an exaggeration. The traditional D-segment longbow had a draw between 70 and 120 lbs depending on the wood it was made of and the thickness of the bow.

[Lucas]

That's a bit of an exaggeration. The traditional D-segment longbow had a draw between 70 and 120 lbs depending on the wood it was made of and the thickness of the bow.

so maybe a full grown small woman ;)

but hey, who doesnt do that on a daily basis right?

[uki]

my brother and i got banned from austria for 10 years after we barricaded ourselves in an abandon building and stacked cobblestones in the window incase we needed to toss them at the 100 or so riot police that surrounded the place... we lasted 6 hours until the alcohol wore off... it was us, a few locals, a few bosnian refugees, and one boston chick who was on a university trip. we were allowed back in this year... boy how time does fly.

so i guess stacking bricks and stones in the windows to throw at police is against the law in austria.apperently some folks belkieve that i am a troll and simply make stuff up to say... all i can say is that perhaps i may be a troll by definition, yet i am an honest one. simon seems to be afraid to visit certain hyperlinks because of whatever reasons... yet to those who are not so petrified of the internent, here is a picture taken of my austrian deportation paper(in english); i am still searching for my austrian bill they sent us to pay... hopefully this appeases, once again, the resident skeptics. :)

http://i538.photobucket.com/albums/ff350/mossjuice/IMG_1166.jpg

[sanjuro_ronin]

LOL @ "Lack of Sufficient Funds" !!
Hobo !

[golgo]

That's a bit of an exaggeration. The traditional D-segment longbow had a draw between 70 and 120 lbs depending on the wood it was made of and the thickness of the bow.

People were smaller back in the day ;)

[SimonM]

apperently some folks belkieve that i am a troll and simply make stuff up to say... all i can say is that perhaps i may be a troll by definition, yet i am an honest one. simon seems to be afraid to visit certain hyperlinks because of whatever reasons... yet to those who are not so petrified of the internent, here is a picture taken of my austrian deportation paper(in english); i am still searching for my austrian bill they sent us to pay... hopefully this appeases, once again, the resident skeptics. :)

http://i538.photobucket.com/albums/ff350/mossjuice/IMG_1166.jpg

Your link is blocked by my work filter.

I am not "afraid" to visit certain hyperlinks. I simply am incapable from viewing a lot of web content (including photobucket) from work.

As almost all my forum time is while at work this means that I don't generally view things from blocked pages... or posted by Sanjuro Ronin because some of his stuff borders NSFW.

I'll look at it from home.

[uki]

LOL @ "Lack of Sufficient Funds" !!
Hobo !hey i was a travelling street juggler... i woke up broke and went to sleep broke... had one heck of an experience though. :D

[GeneChing]

What interests me is that Craig's List is unaccountable. I get a 'cease & desist' for this forum every once in a while. I always tell them that it's not our forum as much as the member. We can ban them and remove the posts, but that member can simply move on to another forum. Then they have to chase them across the internet. I always suggest the settle it with the member with whom they have their grievance. They seldom get it however.


Criminal-libel laws' overreach (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-libel11-2008dec11,0,2882515.story)
Laws that permit criminal-libel prosecution for online trash talk fly in the face of the 1st Amendment.
December 11, 2008

In keeping with Shakespeare’s observation that "he that filches from me my good name ... makes me poor indeed," someone suing for libel ordinarily seeks financial compensation from the person or publication that injured his or her reputation. But archaic laws in several states also allow libel to be prosecuted as a criminal offense, and a Colorado man accused of defaming his ex-girlfriend online now faces the possibility of 18 months in prison.

The prosecution of J.P. Weichel is an affront to the 1st Amendment, and a federal or state court should declare Colorado's law unconstitutional. Allowing the prosecution to proceed any further also would encourage prosecutors in 14 other states with criminal-libel laws to resurrect this "crime" in response to trash talk on the Internet. That in turn might galvanize legislators in states without such laws to enact them. The 1st Amendment would be the loser.

Many Americans will be surprised that the offense of criminal libel exists, though they may remember from history class that in 1798, Congress passed a Sedition Act making it a crime to engage in "malicious writing against the government of the United States." The law, which later lapsed, would be declared unconstitutional today because it punished political speech.

Weichel was not criticizing the government when he posted on Craigslist, under the heading "rants and raves," accusations that his former girlfriend had committed child abuse and welfare fraud and had engaged in sex with a "crooked" lawyer. Such comments were clearly damaging, and Weichel should have been prepared for a civil lawsuit. What he shouldn't have expected was that he would be charged with a crime.

Criminal law is primarily designed to promote the public good, not redress private grievances. Even the Sedition Act, a naked attempt to suppress political speech, was clothed in the language of public safety, linking criticism of officials to the creation of "unlawful combinations against the government." No threat to public safety was posed by Weichel's posts.

Criminalizing libel, as one expert told The Times, replaces a scalpel with a sledgehammer by forcing a defendant to contend in court with the power of the state, not with a plaintiff whose own conduct can be made an issue. Ironically, such laws may have survived for so long because they are almost never enforced; when they have been, courts have intervened, citing constitutional guarantees of free speech. It might be harder to check the use of criminal libel if the offense becomes more popular with lawyers and legislatures because of defamation on the Internet. But libel online, like all libel, is best redressed by replenishing the plaintiff's purse, not by turning the defendant into a criminal.

[SimonM]

Wow, I've seen (and participated in) a lot of flamewars in my time but I don't think I've ever seen one that descends to the point of necessitating cease and desist orders....

Not sure if I WANT to know.

Unless it involves Blooming Lotus. That would be kinda funny.

[Lucas]

Wow, I've seen (and participated in) a lot of flamewars in my time but I don't think I've ever seen one that descends to the point of necessitating cease and desist orders....

Not sure if I WANT to know.

Unless it involves Blooming Lotus. That would be kinda funny.

im suing you for uh...offending my honor, ya.

[SimonM]

Well Uki...

It was a photograph of a torn piece of typewritten paper written entirely in English.

The skeptic in me says it'd be an easy forgery.

However I'm in a giving mood today, and with the content it's just SO much funnier if it's true.

So I'll believe you on this one contrary to my better instinct. :cool:

[DRAGONSIHING]

Simon M is correct about longbows. I have two. In addition to years of training cma, I am also an archery instuctor. They are great fun to shoot and some of the same skills used in Kung Fu and Tai Chi apply. I also shoot barebow recurve and now and then I drag out my compound bow and give the wheels and cams a workout. I enjoy listening to our Canadian friends enlighten us about their politics. Being close to the Southern border that is more of local interest and gets more coverage. Wish you all the best of Holiday Seasons.

[SimonM]

I was taught how to build D-Segment Ash Longbows when I was in highschool by a drama teacher with a lot of anachronystic skills.

Finding sufficient core-wood is the hard part. :s

[Lucas]

Longbows were difficult to master because the force required to deliver an arrow through the improving armour of medieval Europe was very high by modern standards. Although the draw weight of a typical English longbow is disputed, it was at least 360 N (80 lbf) and possibly more than 650 N (143 lbf) with some high-end estimates at 900N (202 lbf). Considerable practice was required to produce the swift and effective combat shooting required. Skeletons of longbow archers are recognizably deformed, with enlarged left arms and often bone spurs on left wrists, left shoulders and right fingers.

Dr. A.J. Stirland. Raising the Dead: the Skeleton Crew of Henry VIII's Great Ship the Mary Rose. (Chichester 2002) As cited in Strickland and Hardy, The Great Warbow. Sutton Publishing 2005. ISBN-10: 0750931671, ISBN-13: 978-0750931670


the bolded section is what i find the most interesting in the english/welsh longbow.

I wonder how many guys are alive to day that live up to the standard set medievil europe, and could actually penetrate plate armor of that time with an arrow.

Think many are alive that have the skeletal deformity that is persistant in the men who did gain this proffeciency?

[Lucas]

now that im thinking about it, any of you ever read that cornwell book. the archer, or archers tale or some such?

[SimonM]

80 lbs: Absolutely (it's actually on the low end).
143 lbs: That's getting up there. It would require a very STOUT bow since the longbow made by England was made from a single piece of ash or yew corewood and not, generally laminates, making such draws rather hard while retaining the necessary elasticity in the wood. However it is still witnin the realm of the possible. Although my understanding is that the majority drew 120 or lower I recall draws of 150 being possible with the best wood.
202 lbs: I question that. I don't think I could personally construct a bow with a draw that tight that wouldn't snap under the pressures required to draw it. Now I'm not a master bowyer by any measure of the word... but I still find that to be a bit dubious.

[Lucas]

but what if you practiced daily from youth.

[SimonM]

It's not a matter of the archer I'm questioning.

It's whether or not you could build an English Longbow with that tension.

See the English Longbow was made from a single piece of ash or yew drawn from the inner section of the core of the tree. This would be shaved into a tapering "D" shaped pattern thinner towards each tip and widest at the base with a gradual and even taper.

The power of the bow is determined by the thickness of the wood. The "D" shaped profile caused the grain of the wood to compress in upon itself and allows the bow to be drawn without snapping.

The heavier the draw of the bow the more likely that the tension required to produce draw will be greater than the natural elasticity of the bow even when enhanced with a "D" shape profile.

I am sure there are archers who could draw a 200 lb force bow. This I don't question.

What I do question is whether the English Longbow, which was about the best of the traditonal, non-laminate, longbows could accomodate that force without being succeptable to easy snapping. I'll say this. The bowyer who built a working 200 lb force bow from core wood, with no lamination and no horn insertion is a true master who I would respect greatly.

[uki]

Well Uki...

It was a photograph of a torn piece of typewritten paper written entirely in English.there's some austian dialect in there... i had that piece of paper for ten years, i hope that would justify it being a bit worn.


The skeptic in me says it'd be an easy forgery.that would be one hell of a forgery trick.


However I'm in a giving mood today, and with the content it's just SO much funnier if it's true.as a martial artist, i would hope you understand the conceots of integrity, honor, and honesty... i may rub off as a troll of sorts, but my words are true... honesty is a virtue.


So I'll believe you on this one contrary to my better instinct.a humble choice. :)

[GeneChing]

This isn't really about liable - it's kind of the opposite. I found it relevant to this thread here.


China Web users have thirst for scandal (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/12/14/MNJS14KREU.DTL&hw=renrou&sn=001&sc=1000)
Vanessa Hua, Chronicle Foreign Service
Sunday, December 14, 2008

(12-14) 04:00 PST Hong Kong, --

China - In the YouTube era, off-the-cuff remarks can haunt American politicians again and again. But that's nothing compared to China, where scandals draw the scrutiny of thousands of Internet vigilantes.

With 253 million Internet users, China recently surpassed the United States with the world's largest Web population. Many use online grassroots search engines known as renrou, or "human flesh," to vent suspicions about alleged wrong-doers.

Mop.com, a Chinese entertainment site, first conceived of a renrou search as a way to exchange information on restaurants, cosmetics and more. One person asks a question and others reply, much as on U.S. sites such as Yahoo Answers or Yelp, which rely on user-generated content.

But Chinese users soon found more excitement in exposing scandal.

In a society without a free press or free elections, such searches not only expose government fraud but also can lead to real-world harassment due to a lack of privacy and libel laws that keep such abuses in check in the United States.

Last year, Beijing housewife Jiang Yan committed suicide after she learned of her husband's affair with another woman. She left behind a blog diary relating her unhappiness, which spurred vigilantes to find her husband Wang Fei's address, paint accusations of murder on his door, protest at his parents' home, and prompt his employer to fire him and his mistress, who worked in the same office. In March, Wang filed a lawsuit against three Internet sites, claiming mental suffering. The case - the first of its kind in China - is still pending.

In April, Grace Wang, a Chinese student at Duke University in North Carolina, attempted to mediate a conflict between pro-Tibet and pro-China students. She was soon branded a traitor online, and users posted her home address in China. Her parents were eventually forced into hiding.

In 2006, video footage of a woman smashing a kitten's head with a spike heel outraged Web searchers. Using clues from the video, they discovered her identity - Wang Jue, a nurse. Even though she later apologized online - blaming a messy divorce for her violent behavior - she lost her job in Heilongjiang province in northern China.

Others have used the Web to mobilize users against fraud and corruption.

In October, farmer Zhou Zhenglong showed a photograph of a rare tiger in the wild. The photo was released with fanfare by forestry officials in north central Shaanxi province who wanted government funding to start a reserve and boost tourism. But Internet activists questioned the finding, and after months of scrutiny - which included questioning the financial interests of the officials involved - authorities revealed the tiger to be a paper cutout. Zhou was arrested on suspicion of fraud, and 13 officials have since been fired or disciplined.

"Many Chinese do want officials to be more accountable, and corruption is a problem, so to the extent that it is possible to expose wrongdoing by using the new tools available on the Web, Chinese Web users are going to take advantage," said David Bandurski, of the Hong Kong-based China Media Project, which analyzes media reform.

In the case of Jiang, the suicide, her family and friends posted details of her husband's affair, which prompted others to seek vengeance on her behalf. "Nobody should die uselessly," wrote a user on Tianya, a community Web site.

The case of her husband, Wang, gained further attention after the popular Hong Kong-based blog East West South North translated postings into English (the above responses are cited from that blog.)

Wang and others targeted online have since discovered that the state has no legal mechanism to protect them from Web attacks. And even though Wang's case is moving through Beijing courts, victims of smear campaigns who live outside of China's large eastern cities may have even less legal recourse, experts say.

"There's no public protection - legal or social - of privacy," said Xiao Qiang, director of UC Berkeley's China Internet Project. "China is not a very transparent society, with a lot of taboos, so exposing something becomes particularly sexy."

Nonetheless, Wang's case is the first of its kind and could set a legal precedent, said Eric Harwit, author of "China's Telecommunications Revolution."

Legislation has also been proposed to limit public disclosure of personal information, which appears to have public support. In June, about 80 percent of 2,491 online users polled believe renrou searches should be regulated, according to the China Youth Daily, a domestic newspaper. About 65 percent of respondents said renrou investigations infringe on privacy, 25 percent support legislation to restrict such searches, and 20 percent fear that they would become targets themselves.

To date, state censors have left renrou searchers alone because they don't touch on such sensitive subjects as human rights abuses and the dissident spiritual movement Falun Gong, analysts say. Nor have they gone after senior Communist officials. Typically, the Communist Party allows the media to report on local corruption, but never on major stories involving top officials.

"Renrou activities do not directly challenge the government or party's authority," said Harwit. "In some cases, they may even strengthen it, as they may provide a kind of justice that the authorities themselves do not, and give citizens some sense that an alternative channel exists to right social inequities."

In fact, China's top leadership is trying to tap into the popularity of the Internet. In June, President Hu Jintao held his first online chat in an electronic forum of the People's Daily, a Communist Party newspaper.
Hu Jintao comments

"I try to know through the Internet what people are concerned about and what they think" on a wide range of topics, Hu told the newspaper. "The Internet is an important space to know about people's thoughts."

Soon after the president's online four-minute chat, the Internet was abuzz with postings. The event had been staged by the Communist Party

[SimonM]

There is something both humorous, reassuring and slightly disturbing about the picture of Hu Jintao sitting at a computer, reading a blog.

[Mr Punch]

It's not a matter of the archer I'm questioning.

It's whether or not you could build an English Longbow with that tension.

See the English Longbow was made from a single piece of ash or yew drawn from the inner section of the core of the tree. This would be shaved into a tapering "D" shaped pattern thinner towards each tip and widest at the base with a gradual and even taper.

The power of the bow is determined by the thickness of the wood. The "D" shaped profile caused the grain of the wood to compress in upon itself and allows the bow to be drawn without snapping.

The heavier the draw of the bow the more likely that the tension required to produce draw will be greater than the natural elasticity of the bow even when enhanced with a "D" shape profile.

I am sure there are archers who could draw a 200 lb force bow. This I don't question.

What I do question is whether the English Longbow, which was about the best of the traditonal, non-laminate, longbows could accomodate that force without being succeptable to easy snapping. I'll say this. The bowyer who built a working 200 lb force bow from core wood, with no lamination and no horn insertion is a true master who I would respect greatly.


Worldwide the average power for bows of all designs is about 220 newtons (50 pounds) at 70 cm (28 inches) of draw which is suitable for most hunting applications. Bows for warfare tend to be much more powerful, with the most powerful bows being the English longbow and the African elephant bow, both of which topped the 900 N (200-pound) at 80 cm (32 inches) mark. Many men in medieval England were capable of shooting bows from 670–900 N (150–200 pounds) — deformed skeletons of archers have been studied, revealing spur like growths on their bones where the over-developed muscles pulled. However, these men did train daily from a very young age and their lives depended on being able to use such powerful bows.[3] There are modern day examples of men who are quite capable of shooting these bows so we know it is possible.

Which pretty much backs up the book Lucas quoted.

It seems bowyers could make them, the difference between English longbows and otehrs being:
According to the British Longbow Society, the English longbow is made so that its thickness is at least ⅝ (62.5%) of its width... and is widest at the handle. This differs from the Medieval longbow, which had a thickness between 33% and 40% of the width. Don't forget, England was famed and feared for its bowmen for centuries throughout Europe. If you can believe in the scientific methods of forging swords in Japan and China since that jibed with their fighting expertise you should believe in the skill of the English bowyer. It was probably the strongest bow in history.

[Mr Punch]

From a separate source, but also on wiki:


The earliest longbow, found at Ashcott Heath, Somerset is dated to 2665 BC,[1] but there are no surviving longbows dated to the period when the longbow was dominant (c. 1250-1450 AD).[2] This is probably because it was in the nature of bows to become weaker, break and be replaced, rather than be handed down through generations.[3] There are however more than 130 surviving bows from the Renaissance period (see Surviving bows). Descriptions range in length from 4 ft 1 in to 6 ft 11 in (1.2 to 2.11 m). They were made from yew in preference, although ash and other woods were also used. Estimates for the draw of these bows varies considerably. The original draw forces of examples from the Mary Rose were typically estimated at 706–804 N (160–180 lbf ) at a 76.2 cm (30 inch) draw length.[4] A modern longbow's draw is typically 265 N (60 lbf) or less. Historically, hunting bows usually had draw weights of 222-266N (50–60 lbf), which is enough for all but the very largest game, and which most reasonably fit adults can manage with practice. Today, there are few modern longbowmen capable of using 800N (180 lbf) bows accurately

The Mary Rose bows had a draw force of 100lbs but that was due to weakening in water, and replicas had a draw force of 150-200. They were a good 100 plus years after the heyday of the English longbow in the Hundred Years' War.

[GeneChing]

This one is just wacky to me. If someone can sue a Yelp user for a bad review, what's to stop moviemakers, tv and book makers from suing any publication for a bad review?

S.F. Yelp user faces lawsuit over review (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/08/MNN81559L2.DTL&hw=yelp&sn=001&sc=1000)
Deborah Gage, Chronicle Staff Writer
Thursday, January 8, 2009

(01-07) 20:04 PST -- In a case that could chill free speech online, a San Francisco chiropractor has sued a local artist over negative reviews published on Yelp, the popular Web site that rates businesses.

Christopher Norberg, 26, of San Francisco posted the first review in November 2007 after visiting Steven Biegel at the Advanced Chiropractic Center on Valencia Street. In the six-paragraph write-up, Norberg criticized Biegel's billing practices and said the chiropractor was being dishonest with insurance companies.

When the chiropractor complained about the review, Norberg replaced it with a new entry a few weeks later that read in part, "I think that he is trying to scare me into removing a negative post (that might explain why he has only positive ones). I believe that he has been harassing me into shutting up, and I feel as a consumer I have a voice and that I can use it on forums made for sharing it, especially when I feel that the experience was unsatisfactory."

Biegel said both reviews were malicious and in February sued Norberg for libel and invasion of privacy. If the case isn't settled, it will go to trial in March in San Francisco Superior Court.

"I'm not looking for my 15 minutes of fame," Biegel said Wednesday. "This suit was filed after a year of trying to resolve this. I am a proponent of free speech, but at the same time, individuals have a responsibility when they publish something as to the accuracy of it."

The case raises questions about whether people can use the Internet to express negative feelings about others and also about the long-term viability of businesses like Yelp that publish third-party reviews, even though Yelp - under the federal Communications Decency Act - is not responsible for the content it publishes.

"Sites that are seemingly well intended are turning into wastelands of defamatory and unspecified allegations," said Aaron Morris, a partner with Morris & Stone LLP in Orange County who is not involved in the case. "There needs to be some sort of blowback against unfettered speech. People should be able to go on and say, 'That's not a true statement about me, and I need to be able to attack this.' "

Norberg, who has a day job designing furniture, had no complaints about his medical care - only how much he was billed for it. In his original review, he wrote, "I don't think good business means charging people whatever you feel like hoping they'll pay without a fuss."

About two weeks later, Biegel wrote to Norberg saying that he was "saddened" by the review and that Norberg misunderstood standard medical billing procedures. Biegel said he asked Norberg to reconsider or remove the review.

"I did not do anything unethical or illegal in our entire dealings," the chiropractor said.

Instead, after receiving a cease-and-desist letter from Biegel's lawyer, Norberg replaced the review with a second posting that remains online.

Biegel's business has been hurt by the reviews, said his attorney, Eric Nordskog of San Francisco. "Although negative reviews are fine, there are certain statements that are false statements of fact," he said. "He accuses Biegel of dishonesty and of committing insurance fraud, which is a crime in California."

Norberg's attorney, Michael Blacksburg, called the reviews "opinion statements" and said that Biegel's business fell off after he filed the lawsuit because the number of referrals he got from Yelp dropped.

"Customers who use Yelp don't want to be another potential lawsuit defendant if they choose to write a negative review," Blacksburg said. "It has nothing to do with who's right or wrong - they're going to go with the chiropractor who chooses not to sue."

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a local nonprofit that supports free speech online, is considering helping with Norberg's defense. Matt Zimmerman, an attorney with the group, said Biegel will get far more negative publicity from filing the lawsuit than from a bad review on Yelp. He said the foundation is seeing more and more cases of people trying to use the courts because they're unhappy with postings on the Internet.

"When people try to pull down unflattering material, it has the absolute opposite effect" of what they intend, he said. "It's very difficult to silence speakers on the Internet - it's a culture of people who don't like those kinds of attempts."

Stephanie Ichinose, a spokeswoman for Yelp, agreed. "Suing one of his patients over a single review (in light of the many positive reviews that he receives on our site) might end up tarnishing Dr. Biegel's reputation rather than enhancing it, not to mention the costs associated with litigation," she said in an e-mail.

Ichinose added that the site tried to head off the lawsuit by mediating the dispute because "both brought legitimate concerns to the table."

Meanwhile, Norberg has started a Web site, standforspeech.com, which has been visited by more than 2,500 people, as well as pages on Facebook and MySpace to raise money for his defense.

"I regret leaving myself so wide open," he said. "I might have taken a couple of days to think about what I could say, but it's Yelp. I experience something, go home and write about it while it's fresh in my mind, then I don't think about it again. If I waited a couple of days, I might not have put anything up."

[GeneChing]

Yelp "free speech" case settled, "responsibly" (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=56&entry_id=34457)

The dispute involving San Francisco chiropractor Dr. Steven Biegel, who claimed he had been defamed by a poster on the business review site Yelp, was settled Friday afternoon.

Neither side is saying much, except that the case was settled "to the mutual satisfaction of both parties." In a subsequent post, the defendant, Christopher Norberg, wrote:

"A misunderstanding between both parties led us to act out of hand. I chose to ignore Dr. Biegel's initial request to discuss my posting. In hindsight, I should have remained open to his concerns. Both Dr. Biegel and I strongly believe in a person's right to express their opinions in a public forum. We both encourage the Internet community to act responsibly."

Not that the debate is over, but it's nice to see references to the notion of responsibility.

The Chronicle's Deborah Gage will have more on the story in tomorrow's Chronicle.
and another yelp case...:rolleyes:

Dentist sues over negative Yelp review (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/13/BU40158CPE.DTL&hw=yelp&sn=001&sc=1000)
Deborah Gage, Chronicle Staff Writer
Tuesday, January 13, 2009

(01-12) 18:37 PST -- A pediatric dentist in Foster City has sued two people over negative comments about her practice that were posted on the review site Yelp, accusing them of libel.

The suit, filed in December in Santa Clara County Superior Court, asks for damages because of the posting, which complained about how Yvonne Wong treated a boy who visited her with cavities.

"I don't want these lies to be posted on the Web site about me," Wong said in an interview. "I'm not looking for money."

Wong said she had no choice but to also sue Yelp because the company refused to take the review down. In the posting, the author, "T.J.," complained that the boy was "light headed" after a filling because Wong gave him laughing gas, and that she used fillings containing mercury.

Wong's attorney, John Terbeek of San Leandro, said the boy's parents should have known about the mercury because they signed a consent form disclosing it. Terbeek said he probably will dismiss the charges against Yelp because he wasn't aware when he filed the suit that Web sites publishing third-party content are protected under U.S. law.

But Wong's case stands against Tai Jing and Jia Ma of Los Altos, the boy's parents. They could not be reached for comment.

This is the second lawsuit to emerge over negative reviews on Yelp, a popular Web site with headquarters in San Francisco.

On Friday, a San Francisco chiropractor, Steven Biegel, settled a libel case he had filed against a former patient, Christopher Norberg, after Norberg posted a review complaining about Biegel's billing practices.

Details of the settlement are confidential. Norberg replaced his post on Biegel's Yelp page with an apology that reads, "A misunderstanding between both parties led us to act out of hand. I chose to ignore Dr. Biegel's initial request to discuss my posting. In hindsight, I should have remained open to his concerns. Both Dr. Biegel and I strongly believe in a person's right to express their opinions in a public forum."

The apology is also posted at standforspeech.com, a Web site Norberg had created to raise funds for his defense.

Both men declined to discuss the case other than to say it has been settled to their mutual satisfaction. "This is an issue I want to put behind me," Biegel said.

Despite Wong's case, Yelp continues to stand by reviewers' rights to post negative reviews about businesses. Yelp does not allow businesses to publicly respond to reviews, although business owners can contact reviewers privately.

Wong said it never occurred to her to contact the boy's parents. "I would be very upset and would not know what to say to them," she said.

No Yelp user has ever been successfully sued, according to Yelp CEO Jeremy Stoppelman, who posted a blog entry about Biegel's case last week.

"Personally, I'm glad we live in a country where freedom of expression is so well protected," he wrote.

T.J. has since taken down all but one sentence of the review, although Wong's low one-star rating remains on Yelp. The full review also still turns up in a search on Google, as does Norberg's negative review of Biegel.

Norberg's lawyer, Michael Blacksburg, predicts more cases. "Yelp and other bulletin board sites ... need to think about how to protect the reviewer and reviewee from flame wars or potentially libelous statements," he said. "How do we culturally train our public to responsibly publish online?"

[sanjuro_ronin]

Are movie production companies gonna be suing reviewers over bad reviews too?

[Lucas]

Are movie production companies gonna be suing reviewers over bad reviews too?

im suing you.

[sanjuro_ronin]

im suing you.

Yeah, SUE THIS BIOTCH !!

[AJM]

It's where you cross the line between being insulting and rude and making allegations of criminal misconduct in a public forum.
That's slander. In a libel case you have to prove negative consequences.

[Lucas]

Yeah, SUE THIS BIOTCH !!

defecation of character!!!! prepare to get rocked in court homeboy. im calling johnny cochran :mad:

[sanjuro_ronin]

defecation of character!!!! prepare to get rocked in court homeboy. im calling johnny cochran :mad:

I say this to you sir:

[Lucas]

lol, chuck....

NSFW (probably,even though im posting it at work :cool: )

lol (http://www.toadking.com/6x9=42/Chuck%20Norris%20Action%20Figure.jpg)

[sanjuro_ronin]

lol, chuck....

NSFW (probably,even though im posting it at work :cool: )

lol (http://www.toadking.com/6x9=42/Chuck%20Norris%20Action%20Figure.jpg)

Awesome.
:D:D:D

[Lucas]

its amazing how easily everything can be related to the norris factor.

[GeneChing]

Come on. This is a martial arts forum. How could we not have a Norris thread (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=39196)?

Lucas, you're pic-link post fu is impressive.

[Lucas]

Come on. This is a martial arts forum. How could we not have a Norris thread (http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=39196)?

Lucas, you're pic-link post fu is impressive.

ahh, the chuck thread, maybe it deserves some attention. :D (we need an evil grin smiley under the green one ;)

as for the pic fu, ive secretly been watching sanjuro at night through a hole in his fence :eek:

[GeneChing]

Have you been following Get Fuzzy? Darby Conley has been busting on web geeks.

It reminded me of all of you - a skinny dude with a dumb dog and a smart ass cat getting irate about what someone posts on the web.

Oh wait, that's me. :o

Get Fuzzy Feb 2 (http://comics.com/get_fuzzy/2009-02-02/)
Get Fuzzy Feb 3 (http://comics.com/get_fuzzy/2009-02-03/)
Get Fuzzy Feb 4 (http://comics.com/get_fuzzy/2009-02-04/)

[David Jamieson]

man i hope "hole in his fence" isn't a euphemism. :p

also, isn't it like this:

libel=written lies about someone else

slander=spoken lies about someone else

and don't you rub it all out when you say at the end " in my opinion" :p

example: "so and so commits anallingus on rats...in my opinion"

[GeneChing]

Web 2.0 defamation lawsuits multiply (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/02/09/MNOJ15F979.DTL&hw=yelp&sn=001&sc=1000)
Deborah Gage, Chronicle Staff Writer
Monday, February 9, 2009

(02-08) 17:04 PST -- The Web 2.0 movement, which ushered in an interactive Internet, sought to put power in the hands of the people by tapping the so-called wisdom of the crowds to change the world - and to keep such a digital democracy in check.

A decade later, as defamation lawsuits have begun to mount, some are questioning the wisdom of the crowds, and wondering if it hasn't turned into mob rule.

"I don't know why this has taken so long," said Andrew Keen, author of a controversial book, "The Cult of the Amateur: How Today's Internet is Killing Our Culture." "The Internet is a culture of rights rather than responsibilities. We have no coherent theory of digital responsibility. The issue has broken through, broken out of Silicon Valley - now it affects real people with real reputations to defend."

Just last week, Juicy Campus - a Web site that was banned from some colleges for its postings of vicious anonymous gossip - abruptly shut down, its traffic redirected to a site called College Anonymous Confession Board, whose owner said he hosts "a higher level of discourse."

Juicy Campus was losing ad revenue because of the bad economy, founder Matt Ivester said in a blog post, but the site also had been scrutinized by several state attorneys general and had some of its posters sued last year by a University of Delaware student who wanted gossip about herself removed from the site. She later dropped the claims. Ivester could not be reached for comment.
Yelp at center of debate

Meanwhile, the review site Yelp, based in San Francisco, has found itself in the crosshairs of the free e-speech debate.

Yvonne Wong, a pediatric dentist in Foster City, recently sued Los Altos couple Tai Jing and Jia Ma after they criticized her treatment of their son in a posting on Yelp. They questioned her use of laughing gas and said they were angry she had used fillings containing mercury.

Wong's lawyer, Marc TerBeek of Oakland, said the review is false, and Yelp has since taken it down.

TerBeek initially included Yelp in the lawsuit, but later removed the site from the filing because he realized that under current federal law governing speech on the Internet, Web sites themselves are greatly protected from being held responsible for users' comments.

Legal scholars have started to ask whether that law - the Communications Decency Act - should be modified, on the grounds that it allows too much irresponsible speech.

"We may put our photos on Flickr and our e-mail on Google and our personal experiences on Facebook," said Brewster Kahle, who founded the Internet Archive, a nonprofit digital library in San Francisco. "But who's responsible for this content? If you want things to go away, does it really?"

The number of people getting sued over online speech, although small, is rising sharply, according to statistics from the Citizen Media Law Project at Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet and Society. Civil lawsuits nearly doubled in 2006 and rose again in 2007 by another 68 percent. Data for 2008 are not available, but more cases filed during these years are being uncovered every day, said Sam Bayard, the project's assistant director.

Defamation claims

Most of the lawsuits claim defamation - false statements of fact that tend to hurt someone's reputation - and involve content published on some of the Web's biggest sites: Google, Yahoo, Craigslist and others.

Californians who get sued over something they've posted online are protected by a state anti-SLAPP law (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation). While the law does not permit libel, it does protect people who speak out on matters of public interest, including protection of consumers, said Mark Goldowitz, an attorney who founded the California anti-SLAPP Project in Berkeley.

Goldowitz, who represents the defendants in Wong's suit, said he's asked that the suit be dismissed. He said dentists and other professionals are especially thin-skinned about online reviews and are prone to sue, even though they are finding that lawsuits are not the best way to resolve these disputes.

Consider Steven Biegel, a San Francisco chiropractor who recently settled a suit against a former patient, Christopher Norberg, after Norberg used Yelp to criticize Biegel's billing practices. Biegel's Yelp page has since been littered with negative comments about his practice and about his decision to sue Norberg from people he said he's never treated.

"It's called flaming," Biegel said, "bombarding someone with negativity. It's an unfortunate ***** in the system."

He said he hasn't talked to Yelp about the bad reviews, although they bother him, because he figures there's nothing he can do. He expects to drop his Yelp sponsorship.

A Yelp spokeswoman said Yelp has automated software that removes untrustworthy reviews, and that business owners can also flag these reviews and ask Yelp to take them down.

Concerned over the direction the free-wheeling Web has taken, some site owners are tightening their rules on what they will allow online.

OpenTable in San Francisco, a site that takes reservations for local restaurants, started publishing reviews of the establishments in September. But the reviews must be current, and only diners who have actually eaten at a restaurant are allowed to write about it, said Scott Jampol, OpenTable's senior director of marketing. That's to prevent both diners and restaurant owners from trying to game the system.

"It shouldn't be the wild, wild West out there," Jampol said.

Real names required

Angie's List, a subscription service that lets people review local businesses, requires reviewers to use their real names and has started allowing businesses to respond to reviews.

"I think it's going to be more and more complicated to decipher who you can trust," said Andy Chen, the CEO of Buzzillions, a Web site in San Francisco that aggregates reviews of hundreds of consumer products written by people who are required to use the products first. "There will be tons of experimentation, and you'll start to see the winning models."

Advocates of unfettered speech, like Bayard, oppose changes in the Communications Decency Act because Web site operators might feel forced to take content down, and that could harm "a lively public debate."

In Technology

"We're very happy": College administrators and many students relieved about site's shutdown. C2

What do you think? Should we require real names? How would we verify that?

[Lucas]

What do you think? Should we require real names? How would we verify that?

id verification. scan/email, copy/fax. ;)

[GeneChing]

Promises, promises....

Yahoo wins court battle over nude photos (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/05/12/BUG517IH2V.DTL&hw=yahoo&sn=001&sc=1000)
Associated Press
Tuesday, May 12, 2009

(05-12) 04:00 PDT Portland, Ore. -- Yahoo Inc. has won a legal battle over removing nude photos that an Oregon woman claimed her boyfriend posted on its Web site without her knowledge or permission.

The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco reaffirmed that Internet service providers such as Sunnyvale's Yahoo are generally protected from liability for materials published or posted on their sites by outside parties.

Cecilia Barnes had filed a lawsuit in 2005 in Portland, claiming her boyfriend not only posted nude photos, but also created a fraudulent profile and posed as her in an online chat room to solicit sex.

Although the court says Yahoo isn't liable for those actions, it left open the possibility that Barnes could sue Yahoo over whether it had promised to remove the photos and the profile.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Promises, promises....

Link to pics??
:D

[Water Dragon]

Accusing someone of child abuse and welfare fraud are serious allegations. I believe those are actually felonies.

Yeah, but only if the man is accusing the woman. If the woman is accusing the man, they call it 'being safe.'

[GeneChing]

Should we just abandon the word 'accountability' from our vocabulary? It's so obsolete. :rolleyes:

Irish student hoaxes world's media with fake quote (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Irish-student-hoaxes-worlds-apf-15201451.html?.v=1)
Irish student hoaxes world's media with florid but phony quote from dead French composer

DUBLIN (AP) -- When Dublin university student Shane Fitzgerald posted a poetic but phony quote on Wikipedia, he was testing how our globalized, increasingly Internet-dependent media was upholding accuracy and accountability in an age of instant news.

His report card: Wikipedia passed. Journalism flunked.

The sociology major's obituary-friendly quote -- which he added to the Wikipedia page of Maurice Jarre hours after the French composer's death March 28 -- flew straight on to dozens of U.S. blogs and newspaper Web sites in Britain, Australia and India. They used the fabricated material, Fitzgerald said, even though administrators at the free online encyclopedia twice caught the quote's lack of attribution and removed it.

A full month went by and nobody noticed the editorial fraud. So Fitzgerald told several media outlets they'd swallowed his baloney whole.

"I was really shocked at the results from the experiment," Fitzgerald, 22, said Monday in an interview a week after one newspaper at fault, The Guardian of Britain, became the first to admit its obituarist lifted material straight from Wikipedia.

"I am 100 percent convinced that if I hadn't come forward, that quote would have gone down in history as something Maurice Jarre said, instead of something I made up," he said. "It would have become another example where, once anything is printed enough times in the media without challenge, it becomes fact."

So far, The Guardian is the only publication to make a public mea culpa, while others have eliminated or amended their online obituaries without any reference to the original version -- or in a few cases, still are citing Fitzgerald's florid prose weeks after he pointed out its true origin.

"One could say my life itself has been one long soundtrack," Fitzgerald's fake Jarre quote read. "Music was my life, music brought me to life, and music is how I will be remembered long after I leave this life. When I die there will be a final waltz playing in my head that only I can hear."

Fitzgerald said one of his University College Dublin classes was exploring how quickly information was transmitted around the globe. His private concern was that, under pressure to produce news instantly, media outlets were increasingly relying on Internet sources -- none more ubiquitous than the publicly edited Wikipedia.

When he saw British 24-hour news channels reporting the death of the triple Oscar-winning composer, Fitzgerald sensed what he called "a golden opportunity" for an experiment on media use of Wikipedia.

He said it took him less than 15 minutes to fabricate and place a quote calculated to appeal to obituary writers without distorting Jarre's actual life experiences. He noted that the Wikipedia listing on Jarre did not have any other strong quotes.

If anything, Fitzgerald said, he expected newspapers to avoid his quote because it had no link to a source -- and even might trigger alarms as "too good to be true." But many blogs and several newspapers used the quotes at the start or finish of their obituaries.

He said the Guardian was the only publication to respond to him in detail and with remorse at its own editorial failing. Others, he said, treated him as a vandal who was solely to blame for their cut-and-paste content.

"The moral of this story is not that journalists should avoid Wikipedia, but that they shouldn't use information they find there if it can't be traced back to a reliable primary source," said the readers' editor at the Guardian, Siobhain Butterworth, in the May 4 column that revealed Fitzgerald as the quote author.

"It's worrying that the misinformation only came to light because the perpetrator of the deception emailed publishers to let them know what he'd done, and it's regrettable that he took nearly a month to do so," she wrote.

Fitzgerald said he had waited in part to test whether news organizations or the public would smoke out the quote's lack of provenance. He said he was troubled that none did.

And he warned that a truly malicious hoaxer could have evaded Wikipedia's own informal policing by getting a newspaper to pick up a false piece of information -- as happened when his quote made its first of three appearances -- and then use those newspaper reports as a credible footnote for the bogus quote.

"I didn't want to be devious," he said. "I just wanted to show how the 24-hour, minute-by-minute media were now taking material straight from Wikipedia because of the deadline pressure they're under."