To: Proud_Infidel who wrote (1610 ) 10/23/2003 9:58:52 AM From: dantecristo Respond to China and VSEA - a match made in heaven for fascist oppressors of civil liberties!mobeta.com ], essentially a 400-page briefing of the couple's three-year court battle with their former employer, is well titled, since it comes as a slap in the face to said ex-employer, Palo Alto-based Varian corporation. Varian thought it had silenced the loquacious Los Altos duo when it won a court trial forbidding them from posting nasty diatribes on Varian's financial Yahoo! pages ("InterNot Free Speech," March 27, 2003), but like another cyborg menace, they're baaaa-ack. ... Delfino and Day have appealed the injunction, and now, in a legal flip-flop, Varian seems to be in hot water for its attempts to suppress the book. In November 2002, Delfino and Day allege that Varian's lawyers had sent letters to bookstores and advertising outlets warning them away from the book by implying that the court order, halted because of the appeal, was still in effect. As a result, distributors like Barnes & Noble declined to carry SLAPP, and local papers declined to advertise it. "I just felt that I know nothing about the book, nothing about them, nothing about anything," admits Paul Nyberg, publisher of the Los Altos Town Crier. Nyberg's paper had initially accepted Delfino and Day's ad for the book, then dropped it after being contacted by Varian's lawyers. "And I thought, here's this big [judgment] that came in, and we just discussed it amongst our staff here and said, 'Well, we're not obligated to run this ad. Let's not get ourselves involved.'" That, according to Jon Eisenberg, Delfino and Day's appeals attorney, was plain wrong. "There would have been nothing wrong," says Eisenberg, "had [Varian's attorneys] written to Barnes & Noble and said, 'A book has been published. We believe it is defamatory. We urge you to consider carefully whether or not you should be distributing this book because it is defamatory.' There is nothing wrong with that. What is wrong is to say that the distribution of this book would violate a court order, because it's not true." ... In a rare move, the appeals court has elected to consider Varian and its attorneys for contempt at the same time it hears Delfino and Day's appeal. A judgment is due within 90 days. "Is it embarrassing [for Varian and its attorneys]?" continues Eisenberg. "Certainly, I'd be embarrassed. I'd be far more embarrassed if it was adjudicated for contempt. If they are held in contempt of the Court of Appeal, to me that would be mortifying." "metroactive.com
