Careful What You Post!

Xavi6

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=71511&in_page_id=34&ito=newsnow

Court orders football website to name users
Thursday, October 18, 2007

Sheffield Wednesday Football Club today won a High Court order aimed at identifying the authors of some allegedly libellous messages on a fan website.

The club, chairman Dave Allen, chief executive Kaven Walker and five other directors had brought proceedings against Neil Hargreaves, who owns and operates www.owlstalk.co.uk.

They claimed that Mr Hargreaves has permitted some users to pursue a "sustained campaign of vilification" against them, and sought to identify 11 individuals behind 14 postings, which appeared in July and August this year.

Mr Hargreaves did not oppose the order or consent to it.

Absolutely crazy. Freedom of speech anyone? Just hope no one from the FAI has been on here lately.

herbieflowers

Depends on what the guys were saying tbh...if they threatened or implied violence or something similar then they deserve all they get...

6th

This is why Boards.ie is uauslly very careful and the "no freedom od speech" angle in pushed quite a bit. Like herbie said, depends what they were saying.

Xavi6

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/19/swfc_net_libel_case/

The owlstalk case focuses on 14 postings made between July and August this year. Among other things one poster suggested the Owl's chief exec spent money on "hookers" and didn't know the difference between a rugby hooker and a football striker.

Deputy Judge Richard Parkes QC said the prostitute claims were unlikely to be taken seriously, but the suggestion that Walker was incapable of spotting a competent football player was more professionally damaging.

I've seen similar/worse here to be fair.

herbieflowers

Perhaps, but that was only one thing out of fourteen mentioned...of course everyone is entitled to espress their opinion but it;s hard to judge a situation without any concrete information...

Xavi6

herbieflowers wrote: »

Perhaps, but that was only one thing out of fourteen mentioned...of course everyone is entitled to espress their opinion but it;s hard to judge a situation without any concrete information...

From the same piece (if you read it) -

"The postings which I regard as more serious are those which may reasonably be understood to allege greed, selfishness, untrustworthiness and dishonest behaviour on the part of the claimants," Judge Parkes said.

That's what the posts contained. What more info do you want?

Spud83

Dont worry, the dont have the internet in the FAI yet. They are still using those old wind up phones.

herbieflowers

yeah wasn't arsed reading it, meh

Xavi6

herbieflowers wrote: »

yeah wasn't arsed reading it, meh

Then why reply? Time waster

missingtime

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

Dont worry, the dont have the internet in the FAI yet. They are still using those old wind up phones.

"They have the internet on computers now"

leninbenjamin

Xavi6 wrote: »

Then why reply? Time waster

in fairness why post part of an article instead of the full thing? if someone goes to the bother of selecting a few passages to copypasta i'd assume they are the only relevant ones to whatever discussion.

Xavi6

leninbenjamin wrote: »

in fairness why post part of an article instead of the full thing? if someone goes to the bother of selecting a few passages to copypasta i'd assume they are the only relevant ones to whatever discussion.

I did post an article in the very first post. It says what happened. That wasn't good enough for some people so I backed it up with quotes from a second article. Then that wasn't enough so I did it again. All that equals one full article and two quotes from another article. Do you want me to wipe your ar*e as well?!

Brian017

Desvered what he got tbh.

btw Xavi, I supported your forum

OhNoYouDidn't

there is a difference between saying 'director x is a wánker' and 'director x hires prostitutes'.

its obvious what that line is.

Xavi6

Brian017 wrote: »

Desvered what he got tbh.

btw Xavi, I supported your forum

Ah cheers buddy. If angling and frisbee can get one then surely AFL can!

Big Ears

If it turns out some of these posts are by 12/13 year olds(which is a possibility) what sort of action would the club take then ?

KdjaCL

Big Ears wrote: »

If it turns out some of these posts are by 12/13 year olds(which is a possibility) what sort of action would the club take then ?

bed without supper?

kdjac

leninbenjamin

Xavi6 wrote: »

I did post an article in the very first post. It says what happened. That wasn't good enough for some people so I backed it up with quotes from a second article. Then that wasn't enough so I did it again. All that equals one full article and two quotes from another article. Do you want me to wipe your ar*e as well?!

eh? you only posted the opening few paragraphs of the first article... it continues past the ads you know :rolleyes: you're providing the scope of the article, i would assume that if you post a part of an article you'd only be posting the relevant aspects... information overload and all that.

and since you're offering... grow the fuck up will ya?

Xavi6

leninbenjamin wrote: »

eh? you only posted the opening few paragraphs of the first article... it continues past the ads you know :rolleyes: you're providing the scope of the article, i would assume that if you post a part of an article you'd only be posting the relevant aspects... information overload and all that.

and since you're offering... grow the fuck up will ya?

My humble apologies for the oversight dear friend, it shan't happen again.

Now what are the chances of you supporting my forum?!

d22ontour

Most decent forums will allow some sort of abuse levels.Unless it's inciting abh then anything should be allowed.I think the 'insert name here 'is a twat posts are harmless and not inflammatory in anyway.Without seeing the posts leading to the action i can't really form an opinion.

KdjaCL

d22ontour wrote: »

Most decent forums will allow some sort of abuse levels.Unless it's inciting abh then anything should be allowed.I think the 'insert name here 'is a twat posts are harmless and not inflammatory in anyway.Without seeing the posts leading to the action i can't really form an opinion.

Other way round most indecent forums will allow some form of abuse.

You be amazed how many people would try sue boards for <insert name is a twat>

I find the boards rule on legal action threats quite right.

kdjac

d22ontour

All respect for boards was lost when they copped out on the episode.Seriously 'posts posted do not reflect the opinion of the owners' go a long way at times.It's a message board not a we will ban yore ass site if yore posts disagree with any potential lawsuits.Disclaimers work in real life , let teh interwebz invoke them.

KdjaCL

d22ontour wrote: »

All respect for boards was lost when they copped out on the m c d episode.Seriously 'posts posted do not reflect the opinion of the owners' go a long way at times.It's a message board not a we will ban yore ass site if yore posts disagree with any potential lawsuits.Disclaimers work in real life , let teh interwebz invoke them.

copped out?

Do you have 100 grand to fight a lawsuit you will more than likley lose?

Your posts are not yours they are boards.ie and boards.ie is publishing them so therefore liable.

So the above thing si correct in the eyes of the law the forum is responsible for the posts on it not the posters.


kdjac

d22ontour

Seriously i post on many other forums and the disclaimer is there for a reason ya know.Eurogamer isn't responsible for any comments posted on it nor is any other top website so why should boards be any different considering boards is one of the worlds top websites ? Anyway, legally wouldn't have a leg to stand on considering a lawsuit against boards seeing as most of the posts regarding them were true.Could disprove the allegations ? Not a chance in hell of it, if the posters went to court and gave the truthful answers.

I feel a ban coming on , so strong, as the song says.....

Having an opinion nor forming one shouldn't be libelious me thinks.

~Rebel~

d22ontour wrote: »

Seriously i post on many other forums and the disclaimer is there for a reason ya know.Eurogamer isn't responsible for any comments posted on it nor is any other top website so why should boards be any different considering boards is one of the worlds top websites ? Anyway, legally wouldn't have a leg to stand on considering a lawsuit against boards seeing as most of the posts regarding them were true.Could disprove the allegations ? Not a chance in hell of it, if the posters went to court and gave the truthful answers.

I feel a ban coming on , so strong, as the song says.....

Having an opinion nor forming one shouldn't be libelious me thinks.

Having an Opinion (Not Fact) and putting it in Print in the public domain if whats said is untrue is libelous. As you said most of what was said was true - not all.

KdjaCL

d22ontour wrote: »

Seriously i post on many other forums and the disclaimer is there for a reason ya know.Eurogamer isn't responsible for any comments posted on it nor is any other top website so why should boards be any different considering boards is one of the worlds top websites ? Anyway, legally m c d wouldn't have a leg to stand on considering a lawsuit against boards seeing as most of the posts regarding them were true.Could m c d disprove the allegations ? Not a chance in hell of it, if the posters went to court and gave the truthful answers.

I feel a ban coming on , so strong, as the song says.....

Having an opinion nor forming one shouldn't be libelious me thinks.

Is that your trained legal view on it or your common sense approach?

What if the said company had better lawyers who ensured they had legs to stand on.

You dont own your post thats the simple view of it the website thats its on owns it.

As an example X player is gay, do i need to prove that in court or does the person suing me have to prove he isnt?


The said company doesnt need to be named i will editing your posts to remove it.

kdjac

5starpool

I like the way you edited d22ontour's posts KdjaCL, but quoted them yourself and forgot to edit that

smackbunnybaby

i posted this a while back in Sheffield Wednesday thread.

today is yet another black day in Wednesday's History.
The already hated Chairman Dave Allen has announced the clubs intentions to sue fans for comments made on a message board.
Really this is a veiled attempt to sue fans he feels are involved in some shape or form with Wednesdayite, a supporters trust who holds 10 % of shares, according to what i have heard.

below is a letter one of the people being sued has written for general circulation to make the media aware of this madness.
NOTE: No one in particular is Possibly Dave Allen

Is this normal behaviour by a chairman?
Using club funds to pay to sue its fans, money which the fans have pumped into the club. The fans that are being targeted arent keyboard warriors, many have given their lives to helping the club. In particular one individual actually worked the turnstyles as did his father.



Dear Sir,

I am one of the many Sheffield Wednesday supporters that the club is looking to sue. If nobody in particular and the other board members get their way, I face bankruptcy, losing my home and jeopardising my 7 year old son’s future.

What could I possibly have written on a internet messageboard that could trigger such a fierce retaliation? I expressed an opinion that the club’s activity in the transfer market was not as genuine as it appeared. I used no foul language, I merely expressed my genuinely held opinion.. I named no-one. Yet apparently, this constitutes defamation. I am also aware of another life long supporter of the club who is subject to possible legal action for suggesting that Chris Brunt would be sold and that we would have a poor start to the season. Both of which are now evidently correct.

Is this what Sheffield Wednesday have now stooped to ? Is there really such tyranny in the boardroom that any dissent amongst the paying customers is met with such excessive action ?

I am advised that if all of the defamation action against the supporters of this club comes to fruition, it will cost the club in the region of £8 million pounds. To what end ? Are the club really going to spend that much money to pursue targets that have little or no money in a bid just to stifle any questioning of their handling of matters in the boardroom ? The action cannot be taking place for financial gain. It is merely bullying and intimidation.

Supporters of the club should be made aware of this. How would fans feel that £8 million pounds is available for these lawsuits, yet we cannot afford to strengthen a team that , given the progress made on the field last season, should easily be challenging for promotion this year ? If supporters knew that this is where their money was being channelled , would there be an outcry ? Would there be fewer attendees ? I guess it’s not possible to speculate as supporting a football club is generally a matter of the heart and it is difficult to switch off one’s passion but I am aware of many supporters who will no longer contribute to the club to fund such a repugnant course of action.

I am copying this letter to the Football League and the FA as I feel that the actions taken by the Sheffield Wednesday directors are harming football in general. Damaging the product. Football has long been a game of opinions and if Sheffield Wednesday get their way and proceed with legal action against 40 paying customers, it will rip the heart out of football in this country.

I implore you to investigate and report on these actions. As journalists, it is your duty to get to the truth and to report accurately on exactly what is transpiring in our football club. Recent articles show a disgraceful bias toward the club. nobody in particular will not be chairman of Sheffield Wednesday for ever, but the fans will always be here and you should bear that in mind when you publish letters and stories without getting a proper balance.

Unfortunately, I cannot provide my name or address as nobody in particular is unaware of my details, he needs these to proceed with legal action against me and, despite the clubs crippling debt, he continues to spend the clubs money to acquire them.

If you have any sense of fairness, you will print this letter, but given the current levels of sycophancy towards the club, you will appreciate that I harbour doubts as to whether you will.

the clubs official statement about the matter:

Club Statement
Posted on: Fri 14 Sep 2007

Sheffield Wednesday Football Club Statement

A fan site has consistently been used as a forum for the posting of untrue and damaging statements about the Club. The Club's lawyers (K&L Gates) have written to the operator of that site regarding his involvement in the publication of those statements and asking for information about the individuals that have made those statements.

We are considering the response from his lawyers and are taking advice on the appropriate action to be taken. The Club expects and welcomes comment from its supporters, but when those comments include false and misleading allegations and accusations, the Club will need to take action to protect its reputation and the reputation of its Directors.

IMO - Dave Allen the chairman hates Wednesdayite the fans group who own 10% of clubs shares.

He wont speak to them, despite numerous correspondances by the group asking him to talk to them regarding making their shares available for an investor to buy.

As far as he is concerned Wednesdayite = Internet Warriors and trouble makers. He has obviously found out the identity of some of these posters to be members of Wednesdayite and is suing them for damaging the reputation of the club when in actual fact they were justing voicing their opinion on the running of the club.

Finally i also posted a link to petiton to get the legal action to stop.
http://www.gopetition.com/online/14296.html

here are some commetns from the judge

"I have not found... as easy as... suggested that I should find it, because I do not accept [the] categorisation of all the postings as containing 'very serious defamatory allegations'. In some cases, they are far from serious. "

"It seems to me that some of the postings which concern the Claimants border on the trivial, and I do not think that it would be right to make an order for the disclosure of the identities of users who have posted messages which are barely defamatory or little more than abusive or likely to be understood as jokes. That, it seems to me, would be disproportionate and unjustifiably intrusive. The postings which in my judgment fall into this category are those numbered [in the Judges documents] 4, which is only capable of being argued to be defamatory by devising a frankly implausible meaning, 7 , which is barely if at all defamatory of the Second Claimant, 8 and 14 , both which in my view are plainly intended as jokes and would have been unlikely to be taken seriously, and 10 and 11 which I regard as no more than saloon-bar moanings about the way in which the club is managed, rather than a serious indictment of grave mismanagement. In my view the same is true of 6 and 12 , which add to the mix a smidgeon of personal abuse of a kind which I would have thought most unlikely to be taken seriously. I take a similar view of the posting numbered 2, which is no more than mildly abusive and is fairly plainly comment."

smackbunnybaby

and finally a link to some of the comments - you will have to read through the doc to find them, they are in point 6.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2007/2375.html

please dont post them

links to radio bit and press conferences

MEDIA REPORTS FROM THIS SEASON


SWFC vs FANS

Calendar Report on SWFC vs FANS - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o51gpNaPNK8

Toby Foster Report on SWFC vs FANS - http://www.owlstalk.co.uk/media/tf.mp3

Ashley Carson on Football Heaven - http://www.owlstalk.co.uk/media/Carson18907.mp3



PRESS CONFERENCE


PRESS CONFERENCE - IN FULL (AUDIO)

http://www.owlstalk.co.uk/media/Part1.mp3

http://www.owlstalk.co.uk/media/Part2.mp3

http://www.owlstalk.co.uk/media/RealRadio.mp3


PRESS CONFERENCE VIDEO FOOTAGE

http://www.youtube.com/v/78AsOlC4E-I

http://www.youtube.com/v/37JfB7Ovjs4

Ponster

Xavi6 wrote: »

Absolutely crazy. Freedom of speech anyone? Just hope no one from the FAI has been on here lately.

You don't have Freedom of speech of private web forums.