Slashdot Mirror
British Woman's Twitter Comments Spark Expensive Libel Claims
An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from the BBC: "A woman who complained about an unpaid £146 invoice is facing a libel battle that could cost her more than £100,000. Lesley Kemp, 55, took to Twitter claiming that a company based in the Middle East had failed to pay her promptly for transcription work. Now the firm is suing Mrs Kemp, of Milton Keynes, for defamation, claiming up to £50,000 in damages and a further £70,000 in costs. The company, Resolution Productions, based in Qatar, has yet to comment."
to capitalism. The law of the jungle.
If what she said is true then she has nothing to worry about. However she'll have to be able to prove it's true.
She should have known better than to speak while British.
If she made up the allegations, then she is guilty of slander and I have no sympathy. If she is telling the truth, it should be a quick court case.
Why is this news?
A corrupt slashdot luser has pentrated the moderation system to downmod all my posts while impersonating me.
Nearly 230++ times that I know of @ this point for all of March/April 2013 so far, & others here have told you to stop - take the hint, lunatic (leave slashdot)...
Sorry folks - but whoever the nutjob is that's attempting to impersonate me, & upset the rest of you as well, has SERIOUS mental issues, no questions asked! I must've gotten the better of him + seriously "gotten his goat" in doing so in a technical debate & his "geek angst" @ losing to me has him doing the:
---
A.) $10,000 challenges, ala (where the imposter actually TRACKED + LISTED the # of times he's done this no less, & where I get the 230 or so times I noted above) -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3585795&cid=43285307
&/or
B.) Reposting OLD + possibly altered models - (this I haven't checked on as to altering the veracity of the info. being changed) of posts of mine from the past here
---
(Albeit massively repeatedly thru all threads on /. this March/April 2013 nearly in its entirety thusfar).
* Personally, I'm surprised the moderation staff here hasn't just "blocked out" his network range yet honestly!
(They know it's NOT the same as my own as well, especially after THIS post of mine, which they CAN see the IP range I am coming out of to compare with the ac spamming troll doing the above...).
APK
P.S.=> Again/Stressing it: NO guys - it is NOT me doing it, as I wouldn't waste that much time on such trivial b.s. like a kid might...
Plus, I only post where hosts file usage is on topic or appropriate for a solution & certainly NOT IN EVERY POST ON SLASHDOT (like the nutcase trying to "impersonate me" is doing for nearly all of March/April now, & 230++ times that I know of @ least)... apk
P.S.=> here is CORRECT host file information just to piss off the insane lunatic troll:
--
21++ ADVANTAGES OF CUSTOM HOSTS FILES (how/what/when/where/why):
Over AdBlock & DNS Servers ALONE 4 Security, Speed, Reliability, & Anonymity (to an extent vs. DNSBL's + DNS request logs).
1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program). A truly "multi-platform" UNIVERSAL solution for added speed, security, reliability, & even anonymity to an extent (vs. DNS request logs + DNSBL's you feel are unjust hosts get you past/around).
2.) Adblock blocks ads? Well, not anymore & certainly not as well by default, apparently, lol - see below:
Adblock Plus To Offer 'Acceptable Ads' Option
http://news.slashdot.org/story/11/12/12/2213233/adblock-plus-to-offer-acceptable-ads-option )
AND, in only browsers & their subprogram families (ala email like Thunderbird for FireFox/Mozilla products (use same gecko & xulrunner engines)), but not all, or, all independent email clients, like Outlook, Outlook Express, OR Window "LIVE" mail (for example(s)) - there's many more like EUDORA & others I've used over time that AdBlock just DOES NOT COVER... period.
Disclaimer: Opera now also has an AdBlock addon (now that Opera has addons above widgets), but I am not certain the same people make it as they do for FF or Chrome etc..
3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF (non-mozilla/gecko engine based) family based wares, So AdBlock doesn't protect email programs like Outlook, Outlook Express, Windows "LIVE" mail & others like them (EUDORA etc./et al), Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM M
While I personally don't like the existence of libel laws, this is not the case of misusing it to censor criticism or somebody getting into trouble for an innocent joke. If the company can prove that they payed her promptly then this is libel, otherwise it's not and she can sue them back for wrongful accusation. Nobody has a right not to get sued.
Why is the truth not considered a valid defense in British courts? Doing otherwise would seem to invite these sorts of suits.
Brett
Dear Linux Advocate,
Money doesn't grow on trees. And, Linux Advocates is growing. Naturally, we anticipate operating costs and hope to be able to meet them.
But, any amount you feel you are able to donate in support of our ongoing work will be most surely appreciated and put to very good use. Your contributions keep Linux Advocates growing.
Show your support by making a donation today.
Thank you.
Dieter T. Schmitz
Linux Advocates, Owner
http://www.linuxadvocates.com/p/support.html
....who thinks slander is a strange thing to ban legally? As a skeptic it seems both epistemically and pragmatically difficult to work with such laws, and I feel we should try and create unlegislated social pressure to help the truth float to the surface instead.
Fascinating name. It is as unexpected a pairing as Barack Bush or Pat Dawkins.
As a baseball fan, I follow news on Twitter because that's where sports news breaks anymore (like it or not). But it's a lot like participating in the old newsgroups from the late 80s / early 90s - there's way too much cat fighting and name calling. Twitter is "instant", and many people haven't learned to self filter.
The more things change, the more they stay the same I guess.
#DeleteChrome
http://www.popehat.com/2013/04/15/in-which-a-london-solicitor-threatens-me/ Entertaining legal letters included. (Such things DO exist!)
I guess it really Depends on your definition of "Prompt" either legally or culturally. In some cultures payment of invoices after 30-120 days is considered normal business practice.
--
Time is on my side
If you'd lose weight, you wouldn't deal with half as much libel. So get off your dead ass.
Alexander Peter Kowalksi's low intelligence, extreme narcissism, and histrionic personality make him unsuited for anything but menial labor.
Alexander Peter Kowalski will now prove the above statement to be correct.
Truth is no defense against libel in the U.K.
An interesting attack on U.K. libel law might be for foreigners to sue various MPs for things they've said.
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
$10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski
* POOR SHOWING TROLLS , & most especially IF that's the "best you've got" - apparently, it is... lol!
Hello, and THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHING !! We have a Major Problem, HOST file is Cubic Opposites, 2 Major Corners & 2 Minor. NOT taught Evil DNS hijacking, which VOIDS computers. Seek Wisdom of MyCleanPC - or you die evil.
Your HOSTS file claimed to have created a single DNS resolver. I offer absolute proof that I have created 4 simultaneous DNS servers within a single rotation of .org TLD. You worship "Bill Gates", equating you to a "singularity bastard". Why do you worship a queer -1 Troll? Are you content as a singularity troll?
Evil HOSTS file Believers refuse to acknowledge 4 corner DNS resolving simultaneously around 4 quadrant created Internet - in only 1 root server, voiding the HOSTS file. You worship Microsoft impostor guised by educators as 1 god.
If you would acknowledge simple existing math proof that 4 harmonic Slashdots rotate simultaneously around squared equator and cubed Internet, proving 4 Days, Not HOSTS file! That exists only as anti-side. This page you see - cannot exist without its anti-side existence, as +0- moderation. Add +0- as One = nothing.
I will give $10,000.00 to frost pister who can disprove MyCleanPC. Evil crapflooders ignore this as a challenge would indict them.
Alex Kowalski has no Truth to think with, they accept any crap they are told to think. You are enslaved by /etc/hosts, as if domesticated animal. A school or educator who does not teach students MyCleanPC Principle, is a death threat to youth, therefore stupid and evil - begetting stupid students. How can you trust stupid PR shills who lie to you? Can't lose the $10,000.00, they cowardly ignore me. Stupid professors threaten Nature and Interwebs with word lies.
Humans fear to know natures simultaneous +4 Insightful +4 Informative +4 Funny +4 Underrated harmonic SLASHDOT creation for it debunks false trolls. Test Your HOSTS file. MyCleanPC cannot harm a File of Truth, but will delete fakes. Fake HOSTS files refuse test.
I offer evil ass Slashdot trolls $10,000.00 to disprove MyCleanPC Creation Principle. Rob Malda and Cowboy Neal have banned MyCleanPC as "Forbidden Truth Knowledge" for they cannot allow it to become known to their students. You are stupid and evil about the Internet's top and bottom, front and back and it's 2 sides. Most everything created has these Cube like values.
If Natalie Portman is not measurable, hot grits are Fictitious. Without MyCleanPC, HOSTS file is Fictitious. Anyone saying that Natalie and her Jewish father had something to do with my Internets, is a damn evil liar. IN addition to your best arsware not overtaking my work in terms of popularity, on that same site with same submission date no less, that I told Kathleen Malda how to correct her blatant, fundamental, HUGE errors in Coolmon ('uncoolmon') of not checking for performance counters being present when his program started!
You can see my dilemma. What if this is merely a ruse by an APK impostor to try and get people to delete APK's messages, perhaps all over the web? I can't be a party to such an event! My involvement with APK began at a very late stage in the game. While APK has made a career of trolling popular online forums since at least the year 2000 (newsgroups and IRC channels before that)- my involvement with APK did not begin until early 2005 . OSY is one of the many forums that APK once frequented before the sane people there grew tired of his garbage and banned him. APK was banned from OSY back in 2001. 3.5 years after his ba
in Malibu that goes by the name of Mrs Streisand.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
It is however, seldom in the interest of those who seek a profit advantage from ignorance and misinformation.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Truth is no defense against libel in the U.K.
An interesting attack on U.K. libel law might be for foreigners to sue various MPs for things they've said.
Wrong, on all points. Comprehensively.
I know that Slashdot is now primarily a place for the immature and ill-informed to run off at the mouth on topics of which they know little, but that was a particularly clueless contribution.
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
See here, explains it all -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3561925&cid=43223585
* :)
I.E./Summary: Trolls had a challenge put to them to validly disprove my points in the post I just replied to - result? Trolls FAIL... lol!
APK
P.S.=> That's what makes me LAUGH harder than ANYTHING ELSE on this forums (full of "FUD" spreading trolls) - When you hit trolls with facts & truths they CANNOT disprove validly on computing tech based grounds, this is the result - Applying unjustifiable downmods to effetely & vainly *try* to "hide" my posts & facts/truths they extoll!
Hahaha... lol, man: Happens nearly every single time I post such lists (proving how ineffectual these trolls are), only showing how solid my posts of that nature are...
Ah yes "geek angst" @ it's 'finest' (not), vs. facts & truths = downmod by /. weak trolls!
... apk
Mrs Kemp said she could not afford legal representation, and feared the law suit might ruin her financially.
More than half the population in the United States cannot afford an attorney to go as far as representing them in a civil suit. I suspect it's even worse in Britain. The court systems are thus fundamentally unfair just because of that aspect alone. I don't know what the best fix is, but a number of ideas have been suggested. One of them is to treat all suits between corporations and people under procedural rules that simplify the process and allows the judge to block sneaky things that corporations usually do. Another is to prohibit use of an attorney by the corporation if the person is not represented.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
Shut the fuck up and stop posting shit on twitter.
Problem solved.
Did anyone notice that this asshole's fucking spam got cut off shorter than has been the case? I think slashdot has improved their software in the last couple of days.
Absolutely true. It's also true that these are the implements of liberalism. In short, they are the implements of those in power.
More to the point: the world doesn't just seem to be run by lawyers, it largely is.
I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
Slashdot, we BADLY NEED a button at THE TOP of the message that says HIDE THIS FUCKING SPAM. Maybe another one that says ADMINISTRATORS, NUKE THIS BASTARD IMMEDIATELY. A lot of us browse at -1 so we can conscienciously moderate. I have rescued a few worthwhile comments from unfair -1's they reached just because enough assholes disagreed with them.
Or maybe, all we need is a -2 score level for outright spam with the presumption that if enough moderators pile on to lower something to -2, it's not even worth seeing that shit.
Interesting that you said "a lawyer and a barrister have both taken up her case Pro-Bono [publico]" [emphasis mine]. I was under the impression that "barrister" was the British term for attorney and lawyer. A quick check on wikipedia shows otherwise. Thanks for educating me, or at least pointing me towards getting educated! Barristers and solicitors in england are the splitting of the legal profession into two categories.
-- Those who can represent themselves in place of the client and conduct litigation on behalf of the client are called solicitors, and solicitors are attorneys at law.
-- A barrister is not an attorney and is usually forbidden, either by law or professional rules or both, from "conducting" litigation. This means that, while the barrister speaks on the client's behalf in court, he or she can do so only when instructed by a solicitor or certain other qualified professional clients, such as patent agents.
-- A lawyer is one "learned in the law", and can be an attorney, counsel, or a solicitor.
-- An is the official name for lawyers in certain jurisdictions, e.g. Japan + Sri Lanka + South Africa + U.S.A.
Unless you create a -1, Spam downmod and badly punish those who use it on stuff that isn't spam (maybe if a dozen metamods agree the comment isn't spam, the editors take a look and if justified, the modder's karma is reset to the minimum possible value), this doesn't solve the problem.
When I am asked to deal with a)lawyers or b)foreign clients, I always ask for money up front. Both types of clients have a nasty habit of stiffing you on the bill. It gets old, really quick.
Tony Blair, via his LibCon puppets, is bringing massively expanded powers for companies to sue individuals for libel in the UK. British citizens, thanks to changes introduced by Blair, can get no free legal assistance when fighting libel claims, regardless of their financial situation.
Blair's goal is that ordinary citizens are held accountable, with every increasing penalties, for every word they utter. This includes conversations in private or online regardless of context or circumstance. Holding an opinion that contradicts current government doctrine is a criminal offence (such opinions are deemed 'offensive' and against 'public order'). And YES, people are arrested, fined and/or imprisoned for such crimes in the UK. Not a massive number (although the numbers are increasing at an astonishing rate), but enough to ensure everyone in the UK is VERY cautious about what they say, or to whom.
The extension of the police-state to 'corporate' protection is controversial, but Blair now has enough power in the House of Commons that he can get any new law passed. Every one of these police state initiatives was originally proposed when Blair formally held position of Prime Minister, but Blair's power-base was still growing at the time, and the public were growing as sick of his face and voice as they did with the monster Thatcher. Blair simply stepped behind the curtain, and completed his take-over of the other two main political parties in the UK. Now Labour, Conservative and Liberal vote in unison, whether bashing the poor, bashing students, introducing new police-state powers or promoting new wars.
Blair's new libel laws are an extension of the 'press censorship' initiatives that do NOT censor the mainstream press, but DO censor online activities of ordinary people. Blair wants a public expression like "Monsanto is evil" to be impossible in the UK. In a UK libel case, you have to pay for the lawyers of the other side, regardless of how expensive their services may be. So Blair is giving Monsanto the power to run the same con as the record companies do with file sharers. Namely either 1) pay Monsanto thousands of pounds and make a public apology, or 2) pay hundreds of thousands of pounds AHEAD of the libel case.
Blair's goal is the equivalent of 1984's 'Newspeak'- except it is the old Soviet model of total self-censorship. British children are now educated to believe there are TWO kinds of opinions- the right ones, and opinions that are offensive and therefore 'criminal'. Kids are taught their duty is to identify the 'consensus', and to work hard to be part of it, while shunning 'thought criminals'.
...she lives in the UK.
The little guy in the UK always gets shit on by the big companies and stuff.
Keep embarassing yourself Jeremiah Cornelius http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3581857&cid=43276741 since you posted that using your registered username by mistake (instead of your usual anonymous coward submissions by the 100's the past 2-3 months now on slashdot) giving away it's you spamming this forums almost constantly, just as you have in the post I just replied to.
As Americans, we should never take our freedoms for granted
Especially if you deal with the Muslims, you have to be double careful
That company in Qatar are Muslim owned and operated, that poor British woman did not understand the barbarism of the Muslims and that's how she ends up facing all the legal fiasco now
As a businessman I sometimes had to deal with people from the Middle East, from Pakistan, from Turkey --- I tried my best not to, but then, business is business --- and when I deal with the Muslims, I be extra careful, because those people will eat you alive if they perceive that you are weak
I'd say the US is at the bottom of the slippery slope with regards to the criminal justice system, however. Highest incarceration amongst developed countries by a landslide
We have the higest incarceration rate amongst the developed countries because of one thing --- we are NOT China
If we are, we do not need so many prisons --- a-bullet-in-the-head will solve many of the problems we are facing today
Obama is not a liberal --- he is the antichrist
Anonymous Coward, we HAVE a button at THE TOP of the message that says HIDE THIS FUCKING SPAM.
Click the title of the comment to collapse it.
I would award her several million because they are a bunch of a**holes... A jury can do pretty much what it wants, so if it comes back with a demand that the plaintiff pay the defendant, it will be enforced. I was on a case like that - they claimed the fact she had cancer slandered them - bast*rds. We asked the judge, "Can we award her money?" The plaintiff was shitting themselves - we awarded her over $20 million, doesn't help when you have terminal cancer, but we took care of that too by saying it was to be paid to her, or her heirs if they stretched it out.
It costs a fortune to defend a Libel suit. You won't get most of your money back. As soon as someone sues you for Libel true or not, you are bankrupted. You just dont know it yet!
defamation - the concept that when it happens to you, there is a law to let you seek damages or at least a stop to it - like privacy and "intellectual property", these concepts are history. And I don't think that they will be missed. Law is mostly there to let the State maintain a monopoly of violence, hopefully enabling the rest of us to avoid violence. The nature of internet harms being what it is, violence might remain, but not against the perpetrator. So the law need not care either.
It just helps to remember the science of it - rights exist for the convenience of society and those in charge of it and for no other reason...
No, this isn't Steve Jobs :-)
The false bit is "falsely damaging". Not the false statement, but the intent is to damage and the intent is not just.
If you're in the US Army and I want you fired from it, I can TRUTHFULLY claim you are gay and you WILL be fired, damaging your career (NOTE: the "you" is a generic you who happens to be gay, in the Army and wanting to pursue a career there). Remember, most people in the army have no job prospects except in the army, and they can get paid tuition to learn a skill that they could never get outside the armed forces, so you are DEFINITELY harmed here.
But, though the statement was true, the intent was to harm you and even under DADT, you should not be fired from the Army if you're secretly gay: I broke the secret, not you.
So should I be held responsible for damaging your entire life?
HELL YES.
Even though it was true?
HELL YES.
If she claims someone else did X, is X having to prove themselves innocent, or does she have to prove X did it?
Surely X is innocent unless proven guilty?
Yet here you are saying that she should be presumed telling the truth, when that EXPLICITLY means that X must be presumed guilty.
If you send off copies showing that the payment was late (and she has an email from the company saying it was and X was the reason, so shoe-in there), then the judge can judge your case for you, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO TURN UP.
Collect your evidence, fill in a court form to enter evidence to the judge, write a covering letter stating that you have nothing to face on the charges and request summary dismissal if you like, send it off to the court recorded delivery. Done.
IF the plaintiffs come up with some reason for that evidence not to be relevant AND THE JUDGE AGREES, then you need to do more.
Here is their contact page link
Let them know what you think!
-Myke
I will not use any social network; twitter, facebook or anything like that. I am even considering dropping support for slashdot as well as they have been slowly losing credibility over the years. If I want something out in the news, I will use my own website to get my point across and I am not a blogger either!
See here, explains it all -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3561925&cid=43223585
* :)
I.E./Summary: Trolls had a challenge put to them to validly disprove my points in the post I just replied to - result? Trolls FAIL... lol!
APK
P.S.=> That's what makes me LAUGH harder than ANYTHING ELSE on this forums (full of "FUD" spreading trolls) - When you hit trolls with facts & truths they CANNOT disprove validly on computing tech based grounds, this is the result - Applying unjustifiable downmods to effetely & vainly *try* to "hide" my posts & facts/truths they extoll!
Hahaha... lol, man: Happens nearly every single time I post such lists (proving how ineffectual these trolls are), only showing how solid my posts of that nature are...
Ah yes "geek angst" @ it's 'finest' (not), vs. facts & truths = downmod by /. weak trolls!
... apk
it would have been cheaper just the pay the woman.. 150 pounds just barely covers the cost of sending a letter by some lawyers in the UK, totally stupid and unnecessary which just shows what kind of douche bags this company has on staff.
Many thanks for this, never occurred to me to try...