Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Non-Tech : Tulipomania Blowoff Contest: Why and When will it end? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mad2 who wrote (2578)	1/25/2000 11:02:00 PM
From: EL KABONG!!!	Respond to of 3543

Mad2, Hmmm... Very strange decision on the part of the judge... This is a very dangerous precedence, in my opinion. I'm only reading a newspaper summary of what was actually said in court. Perhaps there's some details missing in this article that might lend more credence to the judge's decision. In any event, I would expect that the ACLU will now involve itself in this case (only to the extent of debating this particular ruling). This is a very clear case of restricting a citizen's rights under the First Amendment. I would doubt that the ACLU would allow this ruling to go unchallenged (absent any particulars that we are unaware of that are not disclosed in the newspaper article). And upon re-reading the article, it may be that the restrictions are very narrow, applying only to Ziasun and only to statements that may be construed as being false (which to me means that the defense cannot prove that the statements are true, regardless of what the actual facts may be). In any event, it will be most interesting to watch the follow-up on this Ziasun suit... KJC