Naming And Shaming

[anonymous-user]

Here are the PH rules about posting.

The Rules

The rules about naming and shaming said:

You agree that you will not upload, share, post, or otherwise distribute or facilitate distribution of any content - including text, communications, software, images, sounds, data, or other information, that is either:

i) Unlawful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, libellous, deceptive, fraudulent, invasive of another's privacy, sexually explicit, pornographic or otherwise violates our Rules and/or the Terms of Use and Privacy Policies. While we want to encourage creative, original and thought-provoking discussions. The forums are not intended to be a free forum for personal attacks on others or a forum to make disparaging remarks about any person or entity. Nothing you do should interfere with anyone else's use and enjoyment of the Web Site; or


iv)That specifically names companies in relation to accusations of malpractice, fraud or other criminal or civil offences

So is it OK to name companies that we think are crap as long as we're not accusing them of one of the above?

Would calling a company (or one of their products crap) because of X constitute "relation to accusations of malpractice"?

I see companies being named all the time usually in a negative way and just wanted to check the understanding of other members.

I suppose if it's libelous it's us who are somehow going to be sued not Ted.

Edited by stovey on Tuesday 8th August 17:37

[anonymous-user]

Perhaps this should be in the website feedback forum ? Mods?

[r988]

stovey said:

I suppose if it's libelous it's us who are somehow going to be sued not Ted.

Not true as Ted can be considered Publisher I think, but usually best to err on the side of caution.

[mgp1969]

If it's libellous, Ted could be sued for publishing it.

[Parrot of Doom]

You can call anything you like crap. For instance, I think Audi is crap. In fact I know they're crap. Thats an opinion of mine.

But what you can't do is say "Audi came in the night and kicked my girlfriend in the crotch", because thats not really an opinion, its an accusation - and you can't have people on a public forum making wild accusations that could cost a company money, especially when you can't back those accusations up with proof.

Ted just assumes that nobody has proof, its the safest way to be, and I agree with it.

[puggit]

How about if we accuse certain fat authors of books concerning child upbringing of strapping kids to rockets and firing them around the Middle East?

[tinman0]

mgp1969 said:

If it's libellous, Ted could be sued for publishing it.

yes and no. the case that went back to Demon a few years ago was because Demon refused to remove a remark on a news server. if someone posted something libellous, reported it, and it still wasn't removed, then they have grounds to sue.

there have been a few cases since, so it may of changed.

best to keep on the safe side though.

[domster]

Parrot of Doom said:

You can call anything you like crap. For instance, I think Audi is crap. In fact I know they're crap. Thats an opinion of mine.

But if it causes the reputation of another to be diminished, ie people will think less of them than previously, then that can be defamation of character and potentially libellous.

So saying 'I think John Leslie is a rapist, even if the courts don't' is an opinion, yet still libellous if published, assuming you have enough standing for people to respect your opinion.

The basic rules are; you can't defame dead people, so fire away at Princess Di etc. and matters of fact can't be libellous, so you could say 'John Leslie was accused of rape' and he couldn't sue you.

AFAIK