Posted on 03/24/2009 7:01:42 AM PDT by Sir Gawain
I read some lefties opining that we should have lost this motion because people have no right to defame someone anonymously.
I think it is important to clarify our position here.
It has never been our position that people should be able to break the law anonymously (including defamation). Our argument is that "outing" a person online is a drastic thing to do (especially when our opponents like to destroy them after they find out who they are), and it should not be routinely done just because someone files a statement of claim.
We belive that a prima facie case should have to be established before a possibly innocent person's privacy is irrevocably compromised.
We thought this was entirely reasonable. Unfortunately, the judge did not agree.
Nice transparancy look!
hello and sorry to read about this ruling, but am not quite up to speed on all the facts
queens bench ruling against you based solely on a statement of claim seems like a reach, of course
but i’d like to know what was so controversial that someone (allegedly posted) on freedominion that someone sued you as sysops/owners ? is there a libel issue ? or is this one of those fasciist tribunal things? clearly coqb found something compelling, yes ? liberal judges suck but its canada, after all. like all bureaucracies everywhere they love to waste our time justifying their existence and protecting their paycheques, right ?
not trying to play devils advocate or anything but not sure what you are fighting for ? you guarantee your site users anonymity on the internet ?
i’d be willing to fight to the death to defend another’s rights to free speech, but thats the price of freedom. and that person would have to be willing to stand up and own their words.
to defend someone’s ‘right’ to anonymous freedom of speech is something else entirely. i’m not really sure how i feel about that...can someone more enlightened than i am explain to me why this is bad ?
ah sorry your latest response cleared some things up for me, thanks
.
Thanks potlatch -
A “blend” composite at I-M
Thanks for telling, I wondered how you got that effect.
.
You may recall the Eagle/Eagle .jpg I did back a while
Same technique used
For some reason I’m not recalling that one.
Exactly
.
A Bald Eagle and a fighter jet composite blend
The colors and darkness need to be compatible for it to work right
I’ll come across it sometime again.
Thanks Snowyman. That is EXACTLY what I said. It paints a very perverted picture of our current government. PO’s me actually.!! CO
Not true Nully. It’s the left over judicial liberal slime from the 13 years of judicial appointments that Creepien made. Harper is DELIBERATELY not filling judicial vacancies at this time. He needs a majority and then watch out. May all these destructive fools on the “bench” be removed “somehow”. CO
Connie, u got a Trudeau/Creepien judge. Simple as that. And not in reference to your post but anothers, I too, want to know how they knew WHO it was? I have posted many times that I know Stephen Harper thru a mutal GOOD friend. I intend to be meeting with my friend very soon to find out what is happening. CO
Free Dominion was sold to a Panamanian corporation at the time the servers were moved to Panama. There are no known staff of this Panamanian corporation and it is unknown (I believe) who the owners are. Somethings have to be well thought out in advance of possible problems that may arise.
No, he wouldn't.
By the way, welcome to Free Republic.
Damn nasty power spikes down in that power grid can wipe hard drives out in seconds ya know?
What makes you think the U.S. is a safe harbor?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.