Pluvia vs. Westergaard Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Pluvia vs. Westergaard

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Louis Riley who wrote (737)	8/31/1997 1:05:00 AM
From: Jeffrey S. Mitchell	of 1267

Louis, where do you draw the line between fact and opinion? For example, which of the following constitute libel: a) I think Premier did not ship any lasers b) I'm pretty sure Premier did not ship any lasers c) I'm certain Premier did not ship any lasers d) I'm told Premier did not ship any lasers e) No one has presented me with any evidence that Premier shipped any lasers f) I'll be damned if I can find anyone who has been shipped a Premier laser g) I'll wager 10-1 odds that Premier has not shipped any lasers h) It'll be a cold day in hell before Premier ships any lasers i) I have documented proof that Premier did not ship any lasers j) Here's a press release showing that Premier did not ship any lasers etc. etc. My opinion is that the only remote chance the person making those statements can be held for libel is "j", presuming, of course, that the press release that was posted was fraudulent. My reasoning is that because press releases are defined as official company news, fabricating one would constitute a blatant attempt to defraud an unsuspecting public. Judging by your criticism of Pluvia, I suspect your definition is much looser, no? - Jeff

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next