Slashdot Mirror
Juniper Sues Message Board Posters
Anonymous Coward writes "Juniper is suing up to 10 message board posters on Light Reading's telecom news Web site." From the article: "Only two anonymous message board users are identified in the complaint. One goes by the name "infranet_rulz" and the other by "exJuniper981." Juniper admits in the complaint that it doesn't yet know the names of any of the folks it's suing, but it will update its complaint with the courts as it gets details." LightReading has also provided a link to the court papers.
So let me get this right. If I go to a forum, where my participation is solicited (as evidenced by the fact that I am asked to sign up, as well as the ad revenue the sight receives), and post an opinion, I get sued. Wow. So I guess we are only allowed to say nice things about companies, otherwise they use their corporate lawyers to attack us. The funny thing is that if I stood outside the company grounds with a picket sign saying "Juniper Kills Children" then nothing could be done about it, as it's my legal and constitutional (but who cares about the constitution nowadays, huh Mr. Bush?) right. But if Internet Users post an opinion on a forum it is grounds for a lawsuit. Sorry that your stock is crashing because your public have so little faith in you that they listen to every single person who posts anything slightly negative on your forum. Maybe that's your problem.
Difference between a brave man and a smart man: a brave man will die for his country. A smart man kills for his.
These guys are free to sue anybody they want. The posters might need to defend themselves or not. I still don't see how this post is INTERESTING, though.
We are the first ones to complain that "doing something very normal with a computer suddenly makes it something new and innovating" when it comes to patents; yet we're reporting on a libel case because the sentences that are being discussed were posted on a website instead of anywhere else.
The of course one might wonder if this is not a ploy to drive visitors to a website, seeing as the original poster is the owner of the forum where the sentences were posted.
The only interesting point that can be made is: is there still a meaning to a *libel* offense? Wouldn't we all be better off if free speech were, in fact, free? Bear in mind, this would apply to anyone and everybody - and that includes you and your company when your ex-girlfriend decides you're a prick and takes her revenge on you. Of course it also includes that company that keeps ripping off his customers shipping defective hard drives and whatnot. Any thoughts?*
* The objectiveness-impaired and the lunatics are kindly asked not to bother answering.
Global warming is a cube.
Just wondering.... are they going to sue the people who 'mod' them up? And maybe free pizza for those who 'mod' them down?
RIP freedom of speech (9/17/1787 - 9/11/2001). You will be sadly missed.
What on earth does this libel case have to do with 9/11?
Also, why pick that date?
Libel has been illegal for hundreds (if not thousands) of years, and lawsuits alleging libel have been brought many times before 2001.
Not to mention the fact that the TV networks have been self-censored and government-censored for decades (when was the last time a TV network showed full-frontal nudity during prime time; and when was the last time they could do so without being severely punished by the government?), and that private entities have always had the right to restrict speech in their venues. Even by your own bizarre Space Logic, "free speech" died some time long before the turn of the milennium
Does any part of your world view make sense or track with reality?
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
Apparently what they are being sued for isn't important enough to mention in the headline or summary!
They are being sued for defamation and libel. Apparently the message board posters have been claiming that Juniper have been bribing lawyers and spying on employees.
The difference between slander and libel is that one is published and the other is conversation, is it not? So which does a message board count as - a publication or a conversation?
Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
The only interesting point that can be made is: is there still a meaning to a *libel* offense? Wouldn't we all be better off if free speech were, in fact, free?
If this is happening the US, Juniper will lose. Period. End of story. US libel laws are easily one of the weakest you can find in the developed world. In order to get to win a libel case, not only do you have to prove what they said was completely untrue, but you also have to prove that they knew it wasn't true and that they did for malicious intent. In other words, the burden of proof is very much on the guy trying to do the suing. It is extraordinarily rare for libel cases to be won in the US.
Now, if this is happening in say Britain, Canada, or one of the many other countries with strong libel laws, there might be something to this. That said, I think this is happening in the US. I doubt they even get past the first round of court proceedings to find the names of the suspects.
The US has a lot of fucked up policies and laws. The US stance on libel isn't one of them. Unless the posters are shown to be rivals from another corporation posting intentionally incorrect statements, Juniper doesn't stand a chance in hell.
I agree. While it's not hard to RTFA, it certainly makes the summaries much more readable.
At the risk of being told to turn in my geek license, I'll also add that it would have been nice to add a 3-word description of what the fsck Juniper is; or maybe even put a hyperlink to their website. Do they do security? Hardware? Data mining? Human trafficking? What?
- "Nobody came out that night, not one was ever seen. But Old Man Stauf is waiting there, crazy sick and mean!"
I've been thinking about this a lot lately, as I've been checking out Freenet. Theoretically it would be a great place for people to step forward with information about government conspiracies and so forth, but the problem is that since they're anonymous, they have no credentials. They could be senior government officials letting the truth out, or they could just be internet whackjobs.
On the other hand, if you go to a reporter Deep Throat-style, you have to worry about the reporter being arrested and revealing you as the source.
So basically, in order to successfully reveal information, you have to reveal somehow that you're in a position to know that information... very hard to do anonymously.
Can anyone think of a secure way to enable whistleblowing without retaliation?
I yearn for you tragically. A. T. Tappman, Chaplain, U.S. Army.
The truth does not need laws to protect it.