Slashdot Mirror
Lawyer Sues Yahoo for Message Board Name-Calling
Yardboy writes "Yahoo! News has a story concerning one Stephen Galton who has filed a class-action lawsuit against Yahoo claiming the company 'unfairly protected people who post negative messages on its bulletin boards and falsely advertised that it prevents such abusive messages.' Seems he was subjected to name-calling (such as shyster) when he signed up under the username 'stephengalton' in order to respond to a negative post about an unidentified client. As other users chimed in with negative remarks, Galton filed suit against them (it's not clear from the story for what) and sought their personal information from Yahoo via a subpoena. The lawsuit seeks restitution, a permanent injunction and other forms of relief. What's really interesting is all the message board posts relating to the story have been deleted."
That's the trouble with the internet and it's rapid and massive stream of information, some of it your not going to like. Find other ways than litigation to deal with it, as litigation just shines a 10 billion candlepower light on it for all the world to see.
"It's so convenient to have a system where everyone is a criminal" - A. Hitler
Yo Stephen! There is this little thing called the First Amendment to the Constitution that has something to do with another something called free speech. Grow up and learn how to deal with the kids on the playground.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
The State vs. @55|-|@t-84
... but you're a weenie!
I assume this is him?
sgalton@galtonhelm.com
Go on, tell him what you think.
http://news.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?action=m&board= 37172369&tid=nmtechyahoomessagesdc&sid=37172369&mi d=60
:)
I think its important to post this information, before yahoo deletes it.
Please note that I am not posting anonymously.
Feed the need: Digitaladdiction.net
Seriously pal, your not doing your profession any favors here.
bit trollent
Stephen Galton cry-baby, "waa waa, these people are calling me names and making me cry, waa waa".
Sheesh! Get a life, find more useful things to do in life, idiot!
How many times do these lawyers need to be reminded of the 1st amendment and right to free speech??? Don't they learn about this in law school?
Reminds me of a '00 story when Microsoft tried to sue /. over some postings here!!
Wonder how this Lawyer is gonna feel when he sees a zillion Slashdot users calling him "Loser" or worse...and lemme guess next case... Lawyer vs. The rest of us...*sigh*
This Stephen Galton isn't a lawyer himself, by accident?
Oh, man, I could be involved in about a thousand potential lawsuits. Anyone ever get the urge to search google groups for some childish argument you had about something stupid from 10 years ago?
Stephen H. Galton, born Tulare, California, December 23, 1937; admitted to bar, 1970, California.
Education: University of Southern California (B.A., 1966); University of Southern California (J.D., 1969).
Author: "Coping With Punitive Damages: A California Perspective," Best's Review, November, 1981.
Member: American Board of Trial Advocates, Association of Life Insurance Counsel, Conference of Insurance Counsel, Defense Research Institute, Association of Business Trial Lawyers, Los Angeles County Bar Association (Board of Trustees, 1987-1989; Trial Lawyers Section; Member, Legislative Activity Committee, Federal Courts Practices and Procedures Committee, and Superior Courts Committee), Wilshire Bar Association (President, 1986-1987; Board of Governors, 1979-87), and American Bar Association (Member, Litigation, and Torts and Insurance Practice [Life Insurance and Health Insurance Committees] Sections); State Bar of California (Delegate, California State Bar Conference of Delegates, 1976-1986; Chairman, Vice-Chair, and member, Committee on Federal Courts, 1987-91).
Return to Directory of Attorneys
I nominate this litigious asshole to be a Lawyer in Space... With no space suit.
Sorry, here is the correct link
Feed the need: Digitaladdiction.net
1. Get insulted on slashdot
2. Sue Slashdot and those who insulted
3. Profit!
Man, that applies to me in so many other online forums... I could make billions... or even millions! Bwahahaha!
James Tiberius Kirk: "Spock, the women on your planet are logical. No other planet in the galaxy can make that claim."
Well then, if someone's being defamed or libeled, and all the defamatory or libelous comments are deleted, then any accusation that the message board that hosted the defamatory or libelous comments would be questionable at best. One might go so far as to say that the sort of person who'd press a suit accusing the message board provider of negligence in such a situation was an ambulance-chasing shyster with less personal appeal than the Goatse Guy... except, of course, that anyone who said such a thing would probably open themselves up to a defamation of character suit from Mr. Goatse himself.
He isn't claiming that the critical comments on yahoo aren't protected speech under the first amendment; he's claiming that yahoo failed to fulfill their promise to prevent abusive postings, which doesn't have anything to do with the first amendment.
what kind of example is this for kids. i mean you get called names, aren't you supposed to say "stick and stones can break my bones but words won't hurt me"??? And so you get called a few names, it's not a big deal. Stop being so sensitive and take it in stride. Just because you're a lawyer doesn't mean you can sue the crap out of anyone
If this lawyer sings up for an account on Slashdot, he's gonna have a field day.
"You know Myra, some people might think you're cute. But me, I think you're one very large baked potato."
The first slashdotting of a phone number/lawyer?
Linux Wireless Hardware in the UK
What if slashdot got sued (via class action lawsuit) for all the trolls?
Red Bull gave me wings and I flew into the ceiling fan.
That shysters will sue anyone about anything.
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
I would respond to this by calling him an idiot, but I might get sued for that as well.
http://jayceecorder.blogspot.com
Yahoo!'s user agreement doesn't protect someone from being abused like that. At least that's not how I read it. It states the user is responsible to NOT post such abusive things, and that Yahoo! cannot control what its users try to post (to a certain degree). It also states that a person may be exposed to things that will offend them. Therefore, Stephen, by registering with Yahoo! he agreed that this stuff might happen.
Another case of someone just trying to make a buck.
So when is the Hawkeye movie coming out?
he could be suing your ass next lol.
I am billdar, and I approve this message.
I can't put my finger on it, but for some reason that article seems to have a bit of bias...
Whats next, no more Micr0$oft and SCO bashing on Slashdot?
Meet new people, and kill them.
....is almost completely committed by lawyers. This yet another example why America needs tort reform now! On a related matter, the regulation of lawyers by the state bar associations (which are not gov't bodies but are more of a lawyers guild) needs to end. Lawyers should be regulated and punished by *state* (i.e. gov't) institutions elected by the people (not appointed by other lawyers). Only when lawyers like this guy are punished and possibly stripped of their licences will this kind of abuse end. I won't even go into how much lawyers have caused the price of medical care to rise with fivilous lawsuits......
I hate Shakespeare because he's boring, but he does have one good quote. "The first thing we do, kill all the lawyers..." - Shakespeare, Henry VI, Part II, 1590 AD. People need to take Shakespeare's advice... maybe he'll sue Shakespeare now!
Haha! Watch out Slashdot! I've just sent you to legal hell!
A lawyer posted on Yahoo to protect his reputation, was attacked by a bunch of faceless Anonymous Cowards, and is angry because he can't determine their identity because Yahoo's "moderation system" won't filter them out?
Sounds like your typical Slashdot user.
I think among the Slashdot crowd it's of course common knowledge that Yahoo deletes comments all the time, just like Slashdot does. Slashdot has endured legal challenges from the DMCA and weathered them nicely, but this is an entirely different branch of law. Are dicussion sites breaching an implied contract with the user when they fail to protect them from trolling and abuse? Slashdot does its best to prevent this sort of thing, remember the Farenheit 9/11 story in which all Republicans were IP banned from posting - that shows what an effective moderation system can do (and by the way if there are any stupid Repubs in the audience, no, keeping you from posting isn't censorship, silly). But what if an effective moderation system isn't enough to protect us? What then?
If Yahoo loses this suit one could only expect a Slash or Scoop based site to be next. Given that Slashdot is a special case, utilizing a full time staff with unlimited moderation power to instantly IP ban anyone who disagrees too much - but what if even that isn't enough?
We need to brainstorm new ideas for protecting online users from harassment if this lawsuit goes through. The web site you save may be your own!
On a side note, include an email address and link to twenty deleted Slashdot comments for a free Gmail invite. Hint: Slashdot has only deleted about 700 comments.
If guns kill people, then CmdrTaco's keyboard misspells words.
His real name is Steven Bosell.
taken! (by Davidleeroth) Thanks Bingo Foo!
You can sue anyone for anything, no matter how petty or ridiculous - and people do, all the time. It doesn't mean that you're likely to win, or even that your lawsuit has any shred of legitimacy. Most of these sorts of suits are summarily dismissed by the judge before the trial even starts.
In its absolute, strict sense, "free speech" would mean yelling out "Ching, chong, chang....go back to your country....WHITE POWER!" in the middle of Chinatown without the fear of any reprisal.
I worked as a contractor for a company that was at the height of the Internet boom in 2000 and is currently defunct. After the first round of layoffs the yahoo message board for the company stock (now deleted, since the company is no more, and neither is the nasdaq ticker) suddenly gained a bunch of users, discussing in excruciating details some "secret" deals that were on the way, some internal budgeting and executives' personal life.
Some of the stuff was pretty nasty, but at times it was a good laugh, and after a while the company started posting the legalese messages on the board, like "This is the legal dept of such-and-such, just to let you know, this board is being monitored and archived".
Anyway, they sued Yahoo! and subpoened Yahoo! for a bunch of online identities who were clearly former employees discussing what was called "sensitive information" on the public board and that had something to do with "negative public image". Needless to say, Yahoo! just kinda ignored the lawsuit for a while, although a bunch of people were a bit scared about the outcome.
Unfortunately, I dont remember whether it was the court that denied any reponsibility on Yahoo's part, or whether it was the company dissolving (I quit after being there for 2 months), but the identities were never revealed, and since the company went bankrupt, not that it really mattered.
You're a big damn baby.
1)Start a message board on Yahoo. 2) Have all your friends and relatives join. 3) Call each other names. 4) Hop on this shyster's lawsuit. 5) ...
6) Profit!
"You know Myra, some people might think you're cute. But me, I think you're one very large baked potato."
I heard Stephen Galton can only get an orgasm if he kills a small dog. This is what I heard...
No Referrals, fuck off
... the internet.
Its become clear to anyone who has been on for a few years that the internet has a negative tendancy.
This is a result of, or indication of, the level of maturity or immaturity of its general users.
There are alot of things that fuel this, from those going online to release their work day frustrations by dumping it on others, who probably live in some other country which makes law suits even more difficult.
And there are those who like to play games and can hide behind teh online mask they wear..
I'm sure there are alot more reasons, as many as there are those contributing to the problem, for the bias of the internet towards negativity.
But its a limited media too, where mostly communication is typed... making it a two deminsional media that somehow is supposed to represent three and even four deminsional people.
IS the question, "have you ever been misunderstood in something you wrote, via the internet?" better written as "When was teh last time you were misunderstood in what you wrote thru teh internet?" ????
Its so much easier to argue and flame others then it is to really understand them thru this two deminsional media.
There was a time when usenet was made up of computer savy people and decussions were productive but today its gone even beyond negativity into the mess of mass spam...
I was once threatened with a lawsuit (the guy even got my phone number and called me) by a guy who thought I was involved in the production fo the matrix trilogy.... But I wasn't though he did pursue a lawsuit against quite a few that were.
Don't know what became of it but it showed up in legal proceedings found thru such services that search legal proceedings..
Hmmm, maybe there really is a matrix, this internet of negativity....
Till the name "Stephen Galton" is Google bombed with the word "shyster"?
Fuck off and die, troll. Take your stupid shit to the AOL boards. Or better yet take it to the Yahoo boards, post your spam, then call Stephen Galton an asshole and let him sue you. See, this post is on topic afterall!
No one ever insults anyone on Slashdot!
http://www.sendfakemail.com/ + sgalton@galtonhelm.com - (213) 629-8800 == "Hi you are a retard pass it on!"
.... we have to remove all the lawyer jokes from teh internet?
I just hacked into this website and stole your credit card number, Chad. So now I'LL be getting a free flat screen at YOUR expense. What do you think of that, troll?
Yahoo's boards are the equivalent of the messages written on the stalls in gas station rest stops (the guys' ones, don't know what the girls' ones say). Read them if you want to get truly depressed about the human condition.
Really and seriously, would you be afraid of reprisal if you did precisely this?
May we never see th
If the shoe fits...
From what the article says, what was said to Steven is obviously rude, but what else can be done about it? The article didn't mention any racial or ethnic slurs being throw at him.
In this case I don't see how this is so different from calling the guy who cut your car off a jerk or whatnot. More details would be useful.
Kind of funny how AC's bash him, some are marked Troll and others Funny or Informative (whilst posting his personal info, which I think is much worse than throwing a silly jab at him). Yet this is the very thing he's going after yahoo! for.
We're entitled to our opinions, and so long as we don't throw racial, ethnic or gender insults. It will be interesting to see how this case unfolds.
who gave us the world's first spam?
;-P
well then, we have divine justice/ karma, or that "first spam post! w00t!" newsgroup lawyer from the early 1990s should have his butt sued too
regardless, i really can't get worked up too much about this lawyer's horrible, horrible victimhood, since if the real world effect of newsgroup negativity is as potent as this lawyer might insist, then anyone who has ever been flamed or trolled on slashdot probably has grounds for legal action and or psychiatric counseling too
right
hey, found the wikipedia reference to the world's first spam
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Nominate him for Biggest Douche of thh Universe.
Although latin isn't used exclusively in official
duties anymore, I wonder if much has changed since.
I swear, the vermin that inhabit Yahoo boards are the biggest idiots on the planet. Half the posts there are either blatant racist trolls, or stupid political trolls like "BUSH = HITLER" or "Hanoi Botox Kerry is a TRAITOR". These idiots have nothing better to do than sit around all day pretending that they are making a difference in the upcoming election.
Do people actually give their REAL info when signing up for an account?
-Valiss
You do not nor ever have had the right to not be offended!
;)
Also (since you apparently didn't get the memo due to a massive brain/rectum inversion on your part), it's extremely bad form to sue someone for simply calling you a damn dirty shyster; It just proves them absolutely correct.
Almighty Railgun
You Speak a Lethal Gospel!
Bloody Gibs Follow.
sgalton@galtonhelm.com - (213) 629-8800
The first amendment protects you from CONGRESS not from private citizens. "Congress shall pass no law" is how the amendment starts. As far as I can tell, this guy isn't a member of congress. The first amendment doesn't apply here.
http://www.galtonhelm.com/images/ ahahahah OWNED!
http://www.galtonhelm.com/images/WS_FTP.LOG
This reminds me of my nephews (ages four and six) fighting over something that really doesn't make a fucking difference in life.
Welcome to the internet, asshole.
If free speach rocks so much then why post anonymously?
stfu nerd
The website never had my credit card numbers to begin with...spend away
GOd knows what would have happened if he'd joined F*ckedcompany.com...
It seems to me that too many people are unable to just ignore minor harassment. Call me a troll, but this is the characteristic of sissys who can't/won't put up with life. Back when I was in school, I started ignoring assholes, and the harassment began taking a nosedive.
Makes me wish that Lawyers in Space article were more literal.
Please. Don't insult the Goatse Guy.
Comparing him to Stephen Galton, who, by the way, is a DUMB SHYSTER, may very well be actionable defamation.
Microsoft Windows is, fittingly, the official Desktop OS of Olig
If this lawyer is even REMOTELY close to getting any sort of legal resolution to this suit, our good friend Daryl will open the new "SCOCryBaby" division and sue just about every computer geek on the planet for just over 100 Million Billion.
Wow... I can see it now...
"Today SCO CCBE (Chief CryBaby Executive) announced that Lindon, Utah based SCO Group has discovered a butload of emails that ammount to a smoking gun in their fight against the libelous actions of Linuxdom."
Blackrobe "The Original TechnoWeenie!"
StephenGalton.Com is still available. Not surprising given this particular individuals net-savviness (hint: none).
OMG my identity will be subpoenad for making that comment!!!!111hundredeleventyone
SCO employee? Check out the bounty
Can be a fine line. For instance:
"MacGabhain spent most of the 1990s smoking ragweed and cohabitating with a llama." would almost certainly be found to be libel if said outside of a pretty clear comic sense (or, of course, by me).
"Stephen Galton is a poopy-head!" would not be, as it contains no factual claims. Not sure of the content of what he's asking Yahoo! for. Entirely not sure of why he thinks he can make a class out of this.
(Please don't sue /.)
Drill baby drill - on Mars
What an asslicking, piece of shit, motherfucking, dick gobbling, aids infested cum bubble shyster.
I think that Mr. Galton should review California Penal Code 158 at some point, before appearing in court.
"When you can't spell, you look like an idiot in front of us all. Go back to 3rd grad and try again."
Sorry, Mr. Coward, but "grade" has an E in it.
I heard Stephen Galton can't even get an erection unless he dresses up in a clown suit and molests his neighbor's 12 year-old daughter with a hot curling iron.
"and sought their personal information from Yahoo via a subpoena" Because everyone uses their real name and address when making names on Yahoo.
A couple years back, bunch of employees were posting disparaging remarks about the CEO. When it was found out that they were, the CEO decided to sue the people posting the comments. The CEO would have gone after Yahoo, but due to Federal regulations stating that you can't (and the fact that Yahoo would have buried the company), the CEO instead went after people who could not defend themeselves.
...most slashdot posters are ignorant. entirely. 99% of the comments here display a total misunderstanding of the subject at hand coupled with brash confidence in the poster's own idiocy. jesus christ, it's worse than watching some political talkshow where bloated fuckwits trade malmemes in a race to the top of the shitpile. is +5 now the minimum browsing level to read coherent posts? what alternatives to slashdot are out there? is there a way to create a sub-slashdot within slashdot, known only to a select few? do we need to start a 'slashdot rank', promoting those who reach rank 33 into the inner slashdot circle? i guess you'd call such a group of elites 'slashicrucians' or 'knights of the green glow'.
I don't even know why Yahoo! allows post on news stories anymore. In theory it seems like a very good idea but in practice devolves into a cesspool of near pointless negativity and flame wars. Literially hundreds of thousands of flaming posts for popular stories.
I swear there are groups of early teenage boys out there who's stole focus is to start flame wars on Yahoo! message boards. It's a bastion for ignored and disenfranchised youth. Message boards in general are great for people looking for attention not matter what form it takes.
There is a great documentary somewhere in that culture. What type of person is doing all this pointless posting and why?
Chew: You Nexus, huh? I design your eyes.
Roy: Chew, if only you could see what I've seen with your eyes.
See the problem here is that this lawyer can file total bullshit suits like this with no fear of reprisal.
This waste the other party's time AND the government's time costing us all money.
What should happen here is that the first judge to see that paperwork should call him a "stupid crybaby" and fine him several thousand dollars.
It a shame we can't deal with baseless legal threats the same way we deal with threats of physical violence.
These types of threats really do hurt people, and the system should take that into account.
Unfortunately, it doesn't. This is why we have bullshit lawsuits about this like "one click" shopping and the fucking ALT key.
The end result is that both parties spend a bunch of money on litigation. We as taxpayers spend our money as well, and a couple lawyers who knew full well the suit was bullshit get rich.
It's bad for everyone but the fucking lawyers. FUCK LAWYERS.
Are you a "good" lawyer? Then do something about it! Purge the assholes from your ranks!
Do you think doctors would tolerate this type of behavior within THEIR ranks? You're supposed to be fricking professionals.
Life is too short to proofread.
and heres a picture of...
Steven Galton, Shyster
Heres a quick biog of the whining pansy
from his own website (as he is the senior partner)
Galtonhelm shysters ^H^H^H lawyers
you would of thought he was old enough to know better
Shyster or not..... its very very clear that you really are a "NEWBIE" to the internet.
...Don't say that, else I might be dragged into one, I'm a descendent of his wife...oh damn....
*Hides from lawyers*
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
I hope you are referring to him, and not me. ;)
My typing speed is a curse. That 20 second limit between hitting reply and hitting submit is a pain sometimes.....
Feed the need: Digitaladdiction.net
Unmoderated message boards might be like airlines were in the 1950s. Pay your fare, get on, no hassle. Totally vulnerable to all sorts of mayhem that nobody happened to think of doing.
The mayhem we are vulnerable to on today's message boards isn't libel, it's litigation brought by people who can't excuse other people for acting and talking like humans. The result is that people are going to have to be hyper-careful about expressing anything negative, like employers being asked about former employees.
If this gentleman wins his suit(s), imagine how many people George Bush could sue for comparing him with Hitler. Or Courtney Love for calling her a skank? Everybody has the right to their own opinion, as long as they shut up about it.
Fuck off back to 2nd GRADE...
Start the official Big Weenie Google bombing.
...nothing like this ever happens on slashdot?
RIGHT???
Big Weenie
"You might as well get your son a ticket to hell as give him a five string banjo." -unknown minister
lol, what an asshole
sue that, prickface
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_U.S._Election_c
Is that to some extent I think a lot of people out there might consider this a good thing. Every now and again I'll get bored and look at the message boards of some sites I go to, and this seems in many ways a reflection of what I find there. Post after post whining for moderators to lock threads. Many just don't seem to think that discussion with someone whose outlook or beliefs are different will gain them anything, and they're even more against the idea of community moderation instead of having a central authority regulating what can and can not be said. I find it sad that so much of the internet has come to that considering the initial, if somewhat unrealistic in retrospect, ideals of utopian free speech and debate for everyone.
Everything will be taken away from you.
... here. The guy sued his friend for "misbehaving" during groupal sex. This guy claimed that his friend took advantage of his "alcoholical state" and did nasty stuff to him.
The jugje ruled that there are no rules during an orgy, hence, nothing to complain about.
how long until
YEAH YOU!
YOUR MOTHER WEARS ARMY BOOTS!
(Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like yelling)
But there is another kind of evil that we must fear most... and that is the indifference of good men.
I don't want to stoop to name calling but, Stephen Galton is a whiney stoopid ass bitch. .. no offense was intended by that.
... .. I forgot your just a shyster!
Oh yeah
P.S. Stephen if you're reading this
Suck it up and be a man about the thing...
Oops
Stephen Galton is a big shyster. What now, high and mightly lawyer? Going to try and buy out some mod points? Litigate away the simple truth that you can't handle some 12 year old mocking you? Now you've got intelligent folks mocking you too? Good decision.
SAILING MISHAP
Article 19. Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
However:
Article 30. Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.
And:
Article 12. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
So, basically, you have freedom, for as long you don't interfere with other people's rights ;)
(From The Universal Declaration of Human Rights) Maybe, in USA, you have the right to contend this (by the first ammendent to The Constitution). I think that applies only if both contenders are american, but since the net is international, you have to use international law and conventions.
For me, you have to probe that, in a usenet or other net group, you've been the subject of one of such attacks, and not to waste other people's time with an arbitrary legal attack :) unfunaterly, thatis a very common thing in the States...
Carlos Niebla
The fucktards on slashdot don't HAFLD but acts like a lawyer and gets pissed when we correct them.
His fscking HEAD would explode!!!
Sincerely,
Darl McBride
CEO, SCO Groups Inc.
Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
If he was trolling? Oh the irony.
A ruler wears a crown while the rest of us wear hats. But which would you rather have when it's raining?
LMAO ... A spelling flame with a spelling error. It's almost too good to be true. You had better stay anonymous, moron.
You are a fucking lamer.
the fact that the CEO masturbates to pr0n in his office during lunch is hardly something that would be covered by an NDA. also, there are specific basic constitutional and other rights which no company can ever NDA away, no matter how much they want to.
This is to inform you that you are facing a summary lawsuit for use of a "not-entirely-pointy not-very-sharp bladed object" to dispense your "mayo". Although we don't have any evidence that you actually used one of my patent-pending devices, my lawyers and I are making the assumption based on the fact that only a terrorist would use a spoon to dispence mayo. And you're not a terrorist, are you? ;)
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
Stephen Galton is a "shyster" and an "overly robust geezer that makes a living walking behind the elephant with a shovel."
Uhh, the fact that he's suing somebody because he got called a shyster kind of confirms the fact that he's a shyster.
So what. You got called a name. Seriously. Get a fucking backbone, asshole. Shrug it off and move on.
too good to be true... I ran this reply through a spell checker just to be sure.
Between rabid right-wingers and looney left-wingers, the boards get UGLY. I actually saw people laughing when 200+ people died in the Paraguay supermarket fire, people advocating sending the Statue of Liberty back to France due to its country of origin, and other horrific things. Yahoo! Message boards are a hotbed for racism, mud-flinging, and things I don't even want to go into.
yahoo! needs to fix their security, this might be a little off topic, but their account security is a joke, you can get a new password issued easily
So let me get this straight, he was trying to avoid this?
Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
Geek sues Slashdot for trolling
I think I know the reason that lawyers are so hated and often seem childish. It is because they try to follow the law to the letter but not to the spirit, and will often sue those that are following the law to the spirit but not the letter. And since our (Awerican) laws are supposedly based on the Bible, I would just like to point out that we are supposed to follow the spirit of the law, not the letter (2 Corinthians 3:6). Why going against the spirit of the law while following the letter seems childish is because that is what children tend to do. Only after growing up a little do people learn that laws are meant to be followed to the spirit; those who don't seem(are?) childish.
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
Not having much of an insight in the law field, Doesn't he have to prove he isn't a shyster to even have a chance with this case. And furthermore, the comment about the elephant, can this be claimed as defemation when in fact all it is is a way of representng what he does? I work as a piping engineer, and someone could make a similiar statement about me. "All you do is make sure shit flows through pipes, you're a proctologist"
Why do people act like this says anything about the state of torts in this country? The case hasn't even been TRIED for godsakes. How is it an example of why we need tort reform? Is it because the man has equal access to the courts? Well gee, we should strip him of that too! Hasn't anyone stopped to consider that this man is trying his against a gigantic corporate entity? Even if he had a legitimate grievance (which I concede he does not), he would still be screwed. Cries of tort reform should be addressed at genuine abuses of the system, not this baloney (again, for which the proceedings have not even begun).
It's pretty cool that Dan Quayle reads slashdot, but it's a shame he has to post A.C. to avoid harassment like this.
R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
Stephen Galton is a shyster
Speaking of the internet and it's rapid and massive stream of information, check this out
Why don't you print out the caselaw that states that you can sue someone for not getting mad at someone else for calling you names, take the papers and dry your tears.
Mod me flamebait, I don't care. This is too far.
I mod down pyramid schemes in sigs.
In reading this list I must admit my disappointment at the level and tone of the rhetoric. IANAL, but I defend his right to sue, even if he IS one. You criticize and call names, you run the risk of the consequences. I don't necessarily think he should sue, but "publishing" comments calling a lawyer a shyster could have effects on his reputation, and his ability to maintain his reputation.
I know I'll get flamed and modded for this but it would have been a classier dissertation (collectively) to ignore this article rather than trot out all of the old "lawyer" saws (com'on, a little more original and critical thinking out there?!?)
Again, no endorsement from me for his choice to sue, but it's his perogative. (Everyone seems to hate a lawyer until they need one!)
So I'll assume the position..... mod away!
The California Code of Civil Procedure outlines the California anti-SLAPP statute, which would be applicable in this case. The California Anti-SLAPP Project site has more detailed information.
Apparently the lawyer isn't.
Pete Carr Owner Chatmag.com
Stephen Galton is a lawyer. His mama too.
If I had a penny for every time I've been called a name on a message board, flamed in IRC, or warned on AOL Instant Messenger, I'd have no need to pursue this CIS degree I'm currently working on. Get over it man. There are some things in life you can't live with. For everything else, there's ignorance.
I'm sure at least some people in Chinatown watch Chappelle's Show.
Yahoo has been in court literally hundreds of times for all sorts of issues, and the TOS is probably airtight with regards to this case. The only major concession I think the firm has made was to the Yahoo Cake Co of Texas - Yahoo agreed not to enter the cake business, ever.
Little kids do this on the playground daily. Just wait til little Jimmy comes home and tells Dad that someone called him a butthead. That sounds like a $5M suit againts the name caller's parents. Emotional trauma and slander against little Jimmy.
give the shyster a break ;)
I think the AC may be referring to his third (and maybe final) attempt to graduate from High Scool. ;)
Ugh. Add an h in there.
Stephen Galton is a shyster
?Who controls the past now, controls the future.
Who controls the present now controls the past.?
Ooohhh... Shouldn't have said that....
Stephen Galton has declared that he is "taking [his] ball and going home. You guys suck." Film at 11.
"If there's one thing America needs, it's more lawyers. Can you imagine a world without lawyers?" Lionel Hutz
//iirc it then cuts to a great scene of a world without lawyers.
Good links here.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Isn't calling someone a 'shyster' libelous in a way? I mean, if you mean it in the context of 'dishonest lawyer', that sounds pretty specific to his trade and suggestive.
I still believe that someone should have the right to say this, but I can see where this guy might be able to sway a judge.
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
On a related topic, a very similar thing happened today with those Swift Boat vets. Seems they've got a message the DNC doesn't want to get out and are threatening to SUE any TV or radio station that airs it.
Again, is this simply opinion "John Kerry is a Traitor"; or is this libel, "John Kerry doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground."?
See, it's amazing to me that so many talk about freedom of speech, and yet George Bush has been publically called everything under the sun without a lawsuit involved. Should G.W. have sued Gore for his manic "He BETRAYED YOUR TRUST..." speech?
When does opinion become libel?
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
But that is certainly not the case; the only thing that will turn people away from his business is his own response to those remarks, remarks that any self-respecting, thick-skinned lawyer would shrug off without a second thought.
Mr. Galton, shut up and quit your whining. The internet's a big place, full of stupid people. And if you choose to listen to every single stupid person online, you'll end up as a neurotic wreck with no self-esteem. Ignore the trolls, and they'll go away, and you'll be free to chase as many ambulances as you like.
I'm in school to become a engineer right now, you don't take 3 years to go through an engineering program. I've got 2 history classes, 2 political science classes, 3 english classes, economics, 4 math classes, chemistry, 2 physics classes, and speech. That's easily a third of my hours. If you don't count the required BA for a lawyer, you shouldn't count all the prerequisite non-engineering classes in a 4 year degree program. Law school is no joke, my dad is an electrical engineer and he went to law school a few years back. He did well but it was by no means easy.
Lawyers!!
;-)
Trade unions are lot better than them
Nelson Mandela
Mahatma Gandhi
35 of the US Founding Fathers
Cherie Booth QC (who still takes human rights cases against her husband's government, and wins, and incidentally earns 4x more than the PM)
Some of the above, and some more obscure ones, are listed here
However there's still a long way to go when google asks, in response to the search for "great lawyers",
"Did you mean: great leaders?"!
Please read the statute more carefully. It does NOT apply here, since this is not a modern concerning the general public interest, as the statute clearly states. This legislation was drafted with the implication that large corporate entities should not abuse legal process by snuffing out speech which would be of broader concern to the public. This was previously common in California because individuals, when faced by corporate legal teams, would be afraid to say something critical of larger corporate bodies for fear of retaliation, even though that criticism may have been valid. For example, some individual would come out against corporate pollution: clearly a matter of public concern, especially for California. The object of the suit could sue for malicious prosecution but this is next to impossible to prove in the American legal system. An opinion as to the substance of a suit has little to due with whether it is actually abusive of the legal process.
The same sort of thing has happened before in the UK with Godfrey vs. Demon internet. I worked for a few ISPs during that time and when he rang up, you certainly didn't want to bluff your way through the call. I don't know if I agree with attacking the ISP for this sort of thing, but it does give the individual a great deal of power.
Suttree, a weblog about casual games development
Damn right we should blame the lawyers. Who wrote almost every law in the country? Lawyers. Who set up the court system? Lawyers. Who uses TV ads, etc to promote frivolous lawsuits? Lawyers. Who made all our laws so complex that a lay person has very little chance of understanding them, thus requiring a lawyer? Lawyers. Whose powerful lobby groups ensure it will stay this way? Lawyers.
Having lawyers write all your laws is like having your barber decide how fast your hair should grow or having your mechanic decide how reliable a car your should buy. It's a conflict of interest.
Blaming lawyers for the "issues" in the legal system is like blaming programmers for bugs in the code.
Heh, heh...let's see /. get out of this one...
Reminds me of the guy in San Francisco who was interviewed on the street by a local TV station running a story on why people hate lawyers.
He said it was because lawyers were lying, cheating, back-stabbing, no-good, whatever, I don't remember the exact words.
They asked him what he did for a living.
He said, "I'm a lawyer."
A couple of weeks later, they did a follow-up story. It seems this guy was just out of law school and was looking for a job with a local law firm.
He got a ton of offers from local law firms after his ten second spot in the original interview.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
American laws are based on the bible?
I could have sworn they were the product of a secular legislature in a country that admits all faitns as equal
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
Indeed, I have no idea if he is actually a shyster but this does sound like he is now engaging in pettifoggery one way or another :)
pettifogger
Sorry it's my new word of the day.
Judges have the authority to fine a lawyer for filing frivolous lawsuits (or false statements, etc) and to subsequently dismiss those cases with prejudice. (Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.)
They just don't. It's hard to call a lawsuit frivolous, legally-speaking. For the record, I don't think this guy should be suing anybody, but all that's required for libel is that the people who were posting about him say something malicious and knowingly false. And oddly, that's what you prove, not what you require going in. (IANAL)
This painting, Informally known as "Woman with Mayo, Dull Knife" clearly demonstrates prior art.
Never confuse volume with power.
I think the GP was looking for his ^H.
... why do I think this lawyer will win thanks to a DMCA type ruling? Look at what happened to Danny Hellman when he played his little prank on Ted Rall (cartoonists!) a few years ago.
It's not like free speach online is real. Look what happened to Slashdot?
Maybe he's suing so that he can win a large cash award, and then he can afford go to the home of everybody who said mean things about him, and kick the shit of them.
Slashdot claims it has a moderation system to prevent people abusing the discussions.
Not only are abusive posts about me not removed, they are consistently moderated up to "+5 Funny".
Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated up.
The "Disciplinary Board" that you speak of *is* a lawyers' guild. Of the 17 or 18 members a grand total of 2 are non-lawyers. That is definitely a case of the fox guarding the hen-house. I looked at their web-site. Of the something like 15K attorneys listed for Philadelphia, only a relative handful have been disciplined. That is not a very effectual board. Or if you are a lawyer, you could say it is very effectual in protecting lawyers from *REAL* justice by the people.
Additionally, not every state (and probably not even most) have the system that you discribe. For example, Missouri has "The Missouri Bar" which is chartered by the Supreme Court, but is not a government agency subject to democratic controls. As you can read on their web site The Missouri Bar was set up "for the purpose of aiding the lawyers" in policing *themselves* to "maintain the dignity of the profession". Notice that it is merely chartered by the state, but is not an organ of the state. Furthur more "All lawyers who practice in Missouri are required....to belong to The Missouri Bar.... All members of The Missouri Bar pay an annual enrollment fee which supports the activities of the organization". In other words, this is an organziation that is not accountable to the people's elected representatives for their activities or budget the way a department of the state government would be. From what I've seen this setup is the rule, not the exception.
Basically, lawyers write the law (a high proportion legislators are lawyers), interpret the law (since the 80's at least, most states require judges to be lawyers) and discipline themeselves (or not). The legal system is made to enrich lawyers. Lawyers do not create wealth, they parasitically extract it from the populace by using legal extortion ala Stephen Galton.
There has been something similar and yet more rediculous in the aquarium world.
http://www.petsforum.com/psw/Default.html
That's correct, they do. The list is called "topabusers" and it is tied to anyone who disagrees with "The Moderators", a group of people made up (point for point) of Slashdot editors and Slashdot readers in about a 50/50 mix. So, anyone who is moderated down goes into a list of banned IP addresses automatically and can no longer post. The error message generated reads "due to excessive bad posting". You can search the journal section for this string to find hundreds of people banned for their political affiliation.
Hope this helps!
Hey, people: I'm not saying that just calling people names is directly a crime. It just depends on the situation, plain simple. You cannot call someone a "delicate fag" in the middle of a public speech and expect it to be treated as "just your opinion about him". It doesn't matter if you say it is just your opinion, what matter is if other people can interpretate that your affirmation means more than just bad words directed to a person.
And, about the "right to not be humiliated", that's a "right" indirectly covered by injury law, and it does not relates only to your words, your actions (posting a message to difamate him) and intentions can be punished too.
I know it does sound stupid, but "fat" and "ugly" are direct affirmations, clearly crossing the line between your opinion and false statement. But they are just a minor issue here. Saying someone is fat might not give you a suit, but saying someone is a "shyster" can be interpreted as a direct affirmation that the said person is unethical and unscrupulous.
You cannot just say someone is a "unscrupulous and corrupt son of a bitch". You're directly asserting that this person is corrupt. It doesn't matter if his mother is a "bitch" or not, because your statement that the person is corrupt has already given him enough reason to sue you.
I still think his suit was very, very, stupid. But calling him names, using very large groups of people, can give him very good legal arguments.
It is true that any professional, be it a lawyer, doctor, writer or actor needs to protect his/her reputation. However, I find this rather stupid for this dude to sue Yahoo for comments raising anonymously on a message forum. Unless the comments are very specific to a wrongdoing or to an incident detrimental to his/her reputation (a general 'shyster' comment doesn't qualify), this lawsuit is over the top.
It's just this stupid cultural characteristic of this nation. Sue anyone, anwhere anytime for any reason whatsoever. This is the attribute of the wimpus americanus. Good lord not everyone is like that.
read here.
Not only do I generally vote Republican and yet still was able to post on that discussion (thus refuting the claim that "all Republicans were IP banned"), I have also been modded down several times and yet can still post (thus refuting your claim that "So, anyone who is moderated down goes into a list of banned IP addresses automatically and can no longer post.")
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
Ive been called a lot worse than that with and without profanity! for fuck's sake call the cops, I was just slandered on somethingawful's forums, sue Lowtax! :)
On a side note, there was an interesting story about online freedom of speech and message boards. A women published a bunch of sensitive information (and wild accusations about women drugging her and causing her to be raped) about her former sorority, and made a point of publicizing it on other message boards. She didn't stop there, though. She unsuccessfully sued the sorority, which may have countersued. The upshot is that the website in question was taken down, and she may have been forced to apologize in court. The woman and her mother have apparently been aggressive about getting stuff removed from websites that disagrees with their story. Although their site is no longer up, you can see it via the Wayback Machine http://web.archive.org/. Just type in "http://www.chiomegasecrets.com"
I hope you explored the legal implications of your commment prior to posting. With that said, a fat brown envelope is on it's way! :)
So you're on your fourth attempt?
That depends. If he sues you for that, he proves it is truth, so it can't be a libel.
You were nice enough to define 'shyster' for us; now can you please define 'asscandle' and 'fucktable' for us. I, for one, know not of what you speak; but am operating under the assumption that these are not terms of flattery.
Gee, someone who's hurt at being called a name. That's just too bad. Maybe he/she/they should read the Bill of No Rights. You can find it here...s .htm
http://www.sanfords.net/Bill_of_No_Right
Pay particular attention to Article II.
And of course, Goethe's Faus is as fruitful as ever: Proof! World literature uses "syster" sysnonymous for lawyer ! Case dismissed ! Film at 11....
Yeah right, Yahoo is so unsecure that people can use an alias to register an account with them. They can sign up for a Yahoo Mail address using bogus info and automatically get an Yahoo Account to use on message boards.
I wonder what names Yahoo will give that Lawyer?
Let's see, we have like 38 Bill Gates, 31 Steve Jobs, 26 William T. Kirks, 24 Bruce Waynes, etc. None of them are their real names. Or maybe you can track them by IP address? Yet what if they were using a library, or grade school, or high school, or college system? Get the IPs from Yahoo, track it to their ISP, and then subpeona the ISPs to see who holds the accounts. Stand in line next to the RIAA and MPAA who want the names of IP numbers behind file sharing accounts. Good luck!
On the other hand, if the Yahoo Member paid for anything on Yahoo, Yahoo then has their billing address, credit card, etc.
Watch what you say about the lawyer on Slashdot, he may subpeona Slashdot to get the details behind your accounts. See ya in court!
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
Isn't calling someone a 'shyster' libelous in a way?
The German word Scheisser, meaning one who shits, became the English word shyster, meaning one who bullshits. It's not a big jump, Your Honor.
Sit down and write out a simple, WORKING legal code that will address all aspects of society.
I'd start with the following rule, which handles a lot of cases: "If you initiate a coercion against another party, the state may assist the other party in retaliating with reasonable coercion against you." Then most of the rest of law involves defining coercions, hopefully in broad terms based on what libertarian think tanks have come up with, and setting up the administrative agencies that rectify coercions.
Nope, they all 550+ posts are still there.
I picked up "asscandle" from a Brass Eye episode, and "fucktable" came from Clif Yablonski Hates You. Neither are terms of flattery. Also: calling a co-worker a fucktable during an argument is an excellent way to stop the argument (both parties will be laughing too hard to do anything else).
Oh shit, we've hit 800000 users. Fucking 7's never had a chance to be newbs