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.

Technology Stocks : Audio and Radio on the Internet- NAVR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Annette who wrote (2405)	12/15/1998 4:45:00 PM
From: HairBall	Respond to of 27722

Annette: It's scary that it might become a crime to voice your opinion on the web I do not think there is any chance of that happening. Regards, LG

To: Annette who wrote (2405)	12/15/1998 4:46:00 PM
From: Lynn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 27722

>It's scary that it might become a crime to voice your opinion on the web No reason for you to be scared, Annette. From the postings you have made that I have seen, you have nothing to worry about. Personally, I do not find this scary in the least. People should have the same protection in cyberspace as they do in the real world. Likewise, people in cyberspace should also be responsible for their actions and statements here. There is a difference between voicing one's opinion about something or someone and slandering that company or person. These distinctions exist in the everyday world and are now here as well. Nothing for the average person to fear--or even be concerned about. Stiltz1 just made a posting where he said NAVR could hypothetically go through the roof. This is his opinion. Nothing wrong with voicing it either here or on the front page of the _New York Times_. Opinion, which anyone can disagree with. Now if someone started to say things about an officer of a company [any company] or a company itself that was not true, this would _not_ be an opinion but slander. Basically the difference between saying someone is a jerk with the personality of a toad and manners of a pig [opinion] and someone has a shady past, his/her leaving his/her previous position is overcast with the suspicion of embezzlement,--you get it-- [slander]. The people being sued are hiding behind handles while they bash people by name. I can understand why the people victim to this slander are fighting back through our legal system. Use of a handle should not provide people with special rights or absolve them from responsibility. Now the posting you responded to, Annette, was pointing out that had you read the bottom of the news item you posted, you would have seen that it should not have been reposted. Basically, you were violating copywrite law by doing so [read the bottom paragraph]. As was pointed out, the best way to avoid copywrite infringement is to briefly tell people what the article is about then give them the URL so they can read it for themselves. No time for a summary in your own words? Just give the title of the article then the URL. Regards, Lynn

To: Annette who wrote (2405)	12/15/1998 5:41:00 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27722

it's scary that it might become a crime to voice your opinion on the web. Well, maybe. First, what you posted wasn't your opinion, it was somebody else's copyrighted opinion. Second, is it okay for me to voice opinions about you if I know they are false and will damage you? I firmly believe it will never become a crime to voice YOUR opinion on the web as long as that opinion would not be actionable if printed and posted on the door of the post office (a standard location for some notices in our small town). To me, it's scarier that it would NOT be a crime to defame somebody or voice a knowingly false and damaging opinion or publish copyrighted materials just because it was all done electronically instead of on paper.