Depends on what you say.




http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iAfAuNi...LAcUUgD91P0N980

Good to know Lib, thanks. Does that include stuff like "What is a Vietnam Vet" copyrighted by Dan Mauer http://www.vietvet.org/whatis2.htm which a certain person posts continually from forum to forum, like he wrote it. I doubt that this guy is even a veteran and a lot of forums had many complaints about this persons personna and attitude.

Maybe you can help me out in this area, it will be appreciated. TY

Really great article! Thanks for posting it. I see people being VERY inconsistent where free speech is concerned on the Internet. Free speech is fine, as long as the powers that be agree with what's said. And then there's always, the old "private" club excuse for justifying it all.

I can see censoring illegal content, such as child porn or threats of violence (or even other types of porn for a public site), beyond that, either you believe in free speech, or you don't. It's pretty simple.

Seems like a good piece, but it does say it's copyrighted at the bottom. So, if he's plagiarizing, I'd try to contact the writer and report him. I seriously doubt he'll get sued over it, but you never know.

Anyone who doesn't leave a link or give credit to the author deserves to be sued. I think most reputable web sites require it. What some don't understand is that most forums and places to post opinions are privately owned and as such a person must adhere to the rules of the particular site. If you go into someones home or place of business and start trouble your going to get tossed out, the same goes with the internet. Some just can't get that through their heads, free speech only applies to public property.

Very true. I usually find on these kinds of forums, other posters will hammer people pretty hard for not providing links or trying to pass off other people's writing as their own. That in itself is some sort of punishment I guess, but yeah, they do deserve to be sued. I take it from your screen name that maybe youre in the same line of work I am, so you know that lawsuits are expensive, and getting money, or even locating the person doing the plagiarizing is expensive, and then even if they do get a judgment, collecting it from some jerkoff stupid enough to pull that on the web isn't a very likely proposition.

The web makes this kind of thing a real problem IMO. It's so easy to do, and so hard to stop. Too bad it's not a crime of some sort.

I'd like to know whether these policies are surprising to people. Are they offensive to folks? Are the companies cited violating the rights of users?

Sorry don't let the screen name fool you, but I do know a little about the law. The laws concerning the internet are changing as it becomes more accessible. People are getting sued more for stalking and slander than plagiarism but that day will come I'm sure. The burden of proof is still on the accuser but it is getting easier to prove. Depends on how stupid the perpetrator is.

If you don't read the rules of the particular board your on it may come as a surprise, but like anything else you have to read the rules and adhere to them or your going to suffer the consequences.

Wow! Good to know....I've had someone stalking me and it really creeps me out...

Save e-mails, chat logs and take screen shots of anything really offensive.

My, God, I've got half of this board on my hard drive!

Depends on the evidence.

I have had a few people stalk me on the internet. Actually find me on other IM programs and generally fuck with my head. I seem to attract deviance while others are obsessed with deviant behavior I guess. I don't think that is the same as putting up a boundry and saying, leave me the fuck alone. That is called setting up boundries. I have a three strike rule. Some people do not listen so I turn up the volume. If asking about another person's charactor can be considered as libel or slander, good luck with the case. You know how hard that is to do and the question would be, how were you damaged ? And public figures are public figures so who gives a fuck.

Someone mentioned Tom DeLay today Lib. I watched that case with a certain intensity through numerous online sources. It seemed to go dead to me even though threre were like "exclusive" ongoing reports. Bothers me that DeLay was emeshed with Abramoff and this shady deal down in Florida, Ney of Ohio going to jail. Guy was murdered down there. Guy that was the previous owner of Abramoff's new enterprise. Papers say, that a deadman murdered him. Is that the end of the story, I wonder. That is because the stories ended even though we were told Abramoff is in jail providing investigative evidence these days.

So I wonder if they are going to "gag" that one until January of 2009, just like Ascroft seemed to get a poor start on the Plame incident until elections were over in 2004 ? I bet if all the truthers got together and focused on things of this earth would be more interesting than UFOs to me. But, like Sherlock Holmes stories, maybe that would piss off authorities ?

I don't know about charactor assissination in this new age. Seems to be a trick used by Lawyers, Politicians, spies and everyone else that just assumes deviance is a vital tool to any game they are playing. Someone maybe just showing fear being bothered by personal attacks and others may experience real losses. But, that would be pretty hard to prove requiring alot of assets, to me, what do you think ?

Personal attacks are one thing but slander is another and it depends on how wide spread it is. The thing about the internet is the saturation it's not like you put up a slanderous sign in a laundromat that only gets seen by the patrons of that establishment the internet is world wide and someone can effect your life without you even knowing it. The internet will eventually have it's own set of rules I'm sure.

Well again, I don't really know the depth of damages or really who would prosecute. Say for example that I wrote the entire name of an exgirlfriend on a bathroom stall saying she is a biotch, so what ? What is different than that and putting a website up with her picture saying, This is so and so, she is a biotch. Global damage, hahahahahha, because someone is expressing an opinion indicating a person sucks. However, if somehow a person was libeled and slandered to a point of getting turned down for a job damage has been done right ? But would Obama sue McCain for saying that Obama is not to be trusted ? Like come on, even if that would lose the Presidency for him, it's still just politics. Hell anyone get prosecuted for the orginal swiftboat letter ? Is Rather still suing his old employer ?

True, it's the amount of damage and what you can prove. A lady won a law suit over an online forum or blog I don't remember, because she proved that the perpetrator caused her to lose money. It would be one thing for McCain to say Obama's not to be trusted, that would be an opinion, but to say he's not to be trusted because...that's another thing entirely.

Right I understand. In that case she had proof of losses and a perp.

McCain said Obama could not be trusted because Obama changed his mind on public financing. To me that is realworld, realtime decision making taking our economy into consideration.

The Bush/McCain Administration likes to say, "I mispoke". I just say, I lied, or I was wrong or I made a mistake and move on. Important part to me is correcting the error asap but you know, spin will carry that for days and days and days.

But I think that is alot different than charactor assissination by conspiracy if a motive can be proven, opportunity and action(s). Would be something to consider as everyone says that these political action committees can't be controlled. Kerry and McCain both let them slide in the past and Mr. Rather lost his job. It is bound to repeat itself without corrective actions.

Organized Libel or Slander.

So true. But if politicians could sue for slander the courts would be dealing in those cases and nothing else.

Well thanks for the late night discussion. Gone to sleep on it because there is this thing about money involved or Operatives do what they do. I have firsthand accounts of scumbags saying, no offense this is just business.

G-nite

"Private club" is not an excuse, it's a fact. I can't think of many truly "public" areas online. The forum we are at now although offered for the publc use is owned by a private entity, and as such they have every right to have final say on what appears on the pages they host.
It may not be fair to you for them to remove your comments, but they are not violating your first amendment rights. If you had your own (legal content) website and someone had it taken down because they disagreed with it, then your first amendment rights have been violated.

Removing *illegal* content is not censorship.

When you go to a concert, do you have the right to run up on stage and hijack the mic for as long as you want?

Golly, I guess that be why I cited the "private club" explanation. But when you've got a cite about cat litter, and you tell people up front that they will only be permitted to post about cat litter, then it's a little bit different than a site that promotes itself as being about political discourse IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, with guidelines that say they'll only censor certain things, but actually censor when people's philosophies don't match those of the people running it.



What's your point? Are you DICTIONARY MAN, running from place to place tediously analyzing verbiage? Well, you spelled "public" wrong.



No, but concerts weren't designed for discourse, now were they? Try another analogy.

I suspect I've made myself pretty clear, and you're just being a snot and being combative cause it's your thang . . . so carry on.

I make one post disagreeing with you and I am being a snot and combative?
Fair discourse on the internet is not a right. I appreciate the forums that offer it and don't bother with those that don't. Complaining won't change their agenda. Posting at them is supporting them. There are too many good places to discource to sweat 'em.

Would you rather the government step in and force private forums to allow people or things they don't want on their servers? I certainly wouldn't. I support a site's right 100% to make any editorial changes to their site that they wish, and if they blatantly aren't playing by their own stated rules, then those that remain are not folks I would care to discource with anyway.

Make your own nodes, your own servers, and it's as free as can be. Use somebody elses computer then don't be surprised if they restrict what goes on it.

Ok, Lib, here are some continuing thoughts from inside and outside the dots:

Like RICO, if a conspiracy has been organized to inflict damage then this crime is like Organized Libel or Slander. Maybe they will say there is an absence of malice too. I say who cares. If the organiztion was formed, planned and carried out designs to inflict damage on an individual or parties for their own gain, there is some sort of crime here is there not ?

They will say, I am paid to do this. And I will say ahha, you personally gained through this conspiracy then right ? Well, I was only taking orders they will say. I will say if your boss told you to take out your gun and shoot yourself in the head, would you do it ? And that person would probably say I am insane to even suggest that. This person would say I would never kill myself on the order of a boss or anyone else. And would say yea but, you just said you were ordered to act unethically and immorally and you took that order, did you not ?

This is just business, sounds like an enron mouthpiece to me. So you got paid to libel and slander someone, maybe contracted for a dirty trick or two. I know you pricks, who else did you sell that report too ? And the most important reason of all to put this bullshit to bet is this mafia driven little deal, learned through the Cold war or so it is alledged. If I do a dirty trick for you today, I own you. Later on down the road, I may use my work for you as blackmail, oooops I mean leverage, to get something else.

It's alledged that Senator Stevens may have accepted some home improvements and wine. Did the usual suspects get what they wanted and do they in fact own him now ? That is another FBI investigation up north. I wonder who is investigating the Investigator on this one, Inspector General Fine ? I would certain audit that one myself.

Free Speech is not free license to commit crime in my world. But that part about legal wiretaps protecting the innocent really, really bothers me. If you have a chance check out HRC's platform on privacy in the the 21st Century. She gave a speech or two directly to interested and directly tied in groups. She said, parphrasing, I know all about violations of privacy. I think some snoops were in my bedroom too. I would love to explore their motives if I could.

Some feedback if you please.

Sounds like a case for accessory. Your not above the law even if you were coerced into breaking the law but it would depend on the circumstances and whether the prosecutor believes your story.
Of course if your a telecommunications company you could buy up enough Senators to pass legislation and get by with whatever you like.
It's hard to prove conspiracy because you can't always prove intent. That's why prosecutors end up offering deals to some to get at others.

Ok thanks. If someone plays cop, jury and judge, mitigating circumstances are not presented because there is no trial. Now there is arbitration or mediation. Last time I checked the Bar likes ADR. The argument was made exfacto and there was no disclosure to Legislators that I am aware of like, what are we giving immunity from here boys ? There is that old plausible denial that thing to consider though, you know, "Congress can't keep a secret" wink-nod. I am going to eat stick pretzels here you know focused, very carefully savoring every moment, chewing consciously and swallowing accordingly.

LOL I like that.

This is a discussion about an article SOMEONE ELSE posted about free speech, not some kind of agenda I've come up with. I simply stated my opinion, and it seems like your going after me like I'm on a crusade or something. I fully understand the issues, and that privately run websites can do whatever they like. How "free speech" develops on the web has yet to unfold. I have some thoughts and ideas about how it should go - that's all.

Well the sites themselves may be private or public. But as far as I am concerned, I have my privacy even in public. If I go to a store, no one searches me to find out where I live. But if I visit a website, someone may covertly follow me home, putting cookies in my machine. A private message (pm) is private by definition so it should remain that way.

I have not given anyone permisson to virturally tresspass against me. If they snoop on me without probable cause, I consider them to be voyeurist and raping me in certain ways.

To violate the intamacy of another individual without consent or implied consent is rape to me.

Yeah, I agree. The internet is such a new frontier, and there are so many legal issues that are springing from it. The hacking, spam, stalking, harassment, privacy issues, free speech issues . . . and it's so hard to pin people down with all the anonymity. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out, but it will all hinge on what actually can be done, enforcement-wise.

Yes, thanks for the reply. In the meanwhile, I guess protect yourself. I have had private messages intercepted and retransmitted like it was on the front page of the New York Times. If I transmit something from your house to mine in a sealed envelope it ought to remain that way like the United States Post Office. Gee Civil servants handle the mail ? And we got kids all over the place that have hacking skills better than me back in the day .

Yup, that's all you can do right now is look out for yourself and be selective about what websites you click on and who you choose to give your information to. But it's still exciting, isn't it, in the wild, wild cyber west?

I am very addicted to modern technology but won't get into that now, but yes it is certainly mind expanding.

and photoshop has added a whole new dimension to it.

Yeah, I got pretty irritated a couple months ago when I logged in to my Photobucket account to find some images I had saved there (from the Danish Mohammed cartoon controversy) had been removed by Photobucket staff.

Twerps.

The key there is to save them to your computer. Places like photobucket have the right to purge whatever they deem harmful to their site, aggravating as it may be.

Which is the case for anything online, and it's why I don't see an issue with the entire topic of this thread. But it's still annoying, since I post it on PB in order to post in on forums, which I can't do when they're deleted.

There are some who would think they can say whatever they want in a forum such as this, and when they get banned for saying it cry foul and insist that their free speech rights are infringed upon.

Well Lib, it all comes down to who is carrying the badge and what laws they do want and do not want to enforce on any particular day of the week. A townie cop is more likely to let his neighbor go in a speed trap than an out of towner.

I know that the Supreme Court stated that your employer has the right to regulate speech and all, but I have a gripe to make. I stole this slogan off this message board..... the "Stop the Drama, Vote Obama" slogan and put it on my signature on my work email. One person complained and I had to take off. I'm so freaking bummed. If you don't like, ignore it. My only purpose was to open a dialogue with anyone who was interested in learning about Obama. The constitutions says "WE THE PEOPLE" not "WE THE CORPORATION". And for the record, I would delete it from all emails going outside the company. I must have had 50 compliments, but one negative whiner and it's all over.

I told HR that it was a double standard and that I hear the conservatives spew their political vomit all the time. She offered to restrict their speech as well. I said NO WAY! As everyone can see from my signature on this board, I would never ever want to infringe on anyone's right to free speech no matter what. It's just disappointing that I don't get the same treatment from others.

It would be interesting to see what would have happened if you'd put McCain in 08 on there. It seems that conservatives can send out all kinds of stuff but when a liberal does it's suppressed.

Oh by the way, On a certain chat program, I ran into some fellars that were looking for pedophiles, perverts and deivants from a local level. One of the issues I brought up to them was about jursidiction and their methods. What is public and private domain on the internet is gonna be very interesting, stay tuned my friend...

I wonder if it would have different if I had just said "Obama 08".... Maybe she just took offense to the "Drama" part. Stopping the Drama makes people that voted for Bush feel like you think they made a mistake. A lot of conservatives are a lot like Bush.... they don't think.... and they for sure never want to admit a mistake.... just like W.

I know the person that did it and she is one of my direct reports. When I was pregnant, I had gestational diabetes and had to follow a strict diet. Nothing was worse in the world... I couldn't drink.... I couldn't smoke.... and I couldn't even freaking eat. The woman came by my office everyday and told me that I was "starving my baby" because I wouldn't eat the fast food she bought for everyone in the department. I would shut my door and cry. Did I complain to HR...? Hell NO! And when I politely told her that she hurt my feelings, she went off the handle. I'm her boss.... but unfortunately I can't fire her. She's 70 years old and would sue me in a heartbeat.

What's next???? I have to take my Obama sticker off my car, because I park in the company parking lot??? I have to turn off my radio, because I listen to progressives??? I just hate that the lines are being drawn and they keep getting pushed back and pushed back.

It's the old divide and conquer routine. United we stand divided we fall!

Unless you have your own webserver.




It's easier than ya think!