SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Pastimes : Investment Chat Board Lawsuits
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: rrufff who wrote (7457)2/27/2005 11:12:50 AM
From: Jeffrey S. Mitchell  Read Replies (1) of 12465
 
Rrufff, I don't think anyone would argue that legally actionable material is excused simply because it was posted on a gripe site. Where I think you and I (and Lee) disagree about is where a court might put a threshold level of what rises to the level of legally actionable material. Lee and I appear to want the bar placed quite high. My reasoning is that "conventional" defamation is already very hard to prove in court so, for the sake of practicality (i.e. to not clog up the legal system with cases that would have little chance of making it to trial, let alone a favorable verdict for the plaintiff-- which we appear to both not want), a higher bar would weed nuisance suits out, especially those brought by public figures (such as Home Depot, politicians, officers of publicly traded companies, etc.) who are more likely to have the money and means to sue.

- Jeff
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News