Slashdot Mirror
Flight-Sim Maker Threatens Legal Action Over Reddit Posts Discussing DRM (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Today's controversy begins with a Reddit thread that noted FlightSimLabs' A320 add-on installing "cmdhost.exe" files in the "system32" and "SysWOW64" folders inside the Windows directory. The strange filename and location -- which seems designed to closely match those of actual Windows system files -- made some Reddit users suspicious, especially given FlightSimLabs history of undisclosed installations. FlightSimLabs responded on Facebook last Thursday by saying that the files came from third-party e-commerce service eSellerate and were designed to "reduce the number of product activation issues people were having." This system has been acknowledged in the FlightSimLabs forums in the past, and it apparently passes all major antivirus checks.
The "controversy" over these files might well have died down after that response. But then FlightSimLabs' Simon Kelsey sent a message to the moderators of the flightsim subreddit, gently reminding them of "Reddit's obligation as a publisher... to ensure that any libelous content is taken down as soon as you become aware of it." While ostensibly welcoming "robust fair comment and opinion," the message also warns that "ANY suggestion that our current or future products pose any threat to users is absolutely false and libelous." That warning extends to the company's previous password-extractor controversy, with Kelsey writing, "ANY suggestion that any user's data was compromised during the events of February is entirely false and therefore libelous." "I would hate for lawyers to have to get involved in this, and I trust that you will take appropriate steps to ensure that no such libel is posted," Kelsey concludes. A follow-up message from Kelsey reiterated the same points and noted that FlightSimLabs has reported specific comments and demanded they be removed as libelous.
The "controversy" over these files might well have died down after that response. But then FlightSimLabs' Simon Kelsey sent a message to the moderators of the flightsim subreddit, gently reminding them of "Reddit's obligation as a publisher... to ensure that any libelous content is taken down as soon as you become aware of it." While ostensibly welcoming "robust fair comment and opinion," the message also warns that "ANY suggestion that our current or future products pose any threat to users is absolutely false and libelous." That warning extends to the company's previous password-extractor controversy, with Kelsey writing, "ANY suggestion that any user's data was compromised during the events of February is entirely false and therefore libelous." "I would hate for lawyers to have to get involved in this, and I trust that you will take appropriate steps to ensure that no such libel is posted," Kelsey concludes. A follow-up message from Kelsey reiterated the same points and noted that FlightSimLabs has reported specific comments and demanded they be removed as libelous.
But I thought that libel was something that forum sites were protected against.
No, actual legally defined libel has no specific protections.
The site when served legal papers requesting it, is supposed to pass on the information they have about the poster. Failing to do that can very well make the legal buck stop on the sites shoulders.
But that isn't really the issue here.
The questions are if the comments even qualify to potentially be libel, and if and only if so, did a court deem them so.
Options by definition can never be libel or slander.
Claims to facts are the only things that potentially can be libel or slander.
This alone makes the companies claim dubious, when they word it as "ANY suggestion that our current or future products pose any threat to users is absolutely false and libelous"
Posting "I think they would do _" can never be libel, as it is an opinion that can't be proven.
Posting "They have done _" however is a fact, and if found to be a false-fact may qualify as libel.
Both libel and slander are forms of tort law (libel being a written tort and slander being a spoken tort)
https://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1153
Specifically:
" It is a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity open to a lawsuit for damages by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie."
"Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact and is not clearly identified as an opinion."
and to your question about websites or forums being protected:
"Most states provide for a party defamed by a periodical to demand a published retraction. If the correction is made, then there is no right to file a lawsuit. "
I haven’t been keeping up with flight sims for years but if I come back I’ll keep them on my don’t buy list.