ans Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 Ding Ding Ding You win a prize Mr Slim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 Forum sites are not protected as well as they think they are if the identity of the person that makes the alegation can be proved, the admin can be requested by the courts to provide the identity of the poster and if not provided action can then be taken against the forum. Forum sites get threatened all the time with this stuff, and it rarely comes to anything but an exchange of lawyers letters. Don't forget theres a lot of complications that goes in the way of identifying posters, the physical location of the data and the laws that governs that, the lack of identifying information held by the forum, the inability of an IP address to identify an individual. A good example of this is the post I'm replying to. I'm pretty sure that both patiom and theskeet will be posting on the same IP address, perhaps even the same PC. Are they the same person or a man and wife both using Manx Forums? Forensics on the pc making the post may help reveal that information, but none of that is the responsibility of the forum owner. It's like suing manx telecom for someone making abusive phone calls. MT would have a duty to try and do everything they can to assist in the complaint, but they're not breaking the law, the person who made the call is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 I really don't understand. What's wrong with McDougal's flour? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slinkydevil Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 Please file in 'classic thread' vault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesultanofsheight Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 It could be a good spoof. As a general rule I'm always suspicious of big companies that hide behind lawyers and have that US Corporate "We'll sue your ass into the ground" attitude. Just because you stamp down on people who say your product is rubbish or whatever does not stop your product being rubbish, it just frightens people off saying its rubbish and makes you look frightened and/or stupid in the process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
www.theislandinsider.co.uk Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 Well I've now been into work again today after a few days off and I can honestly tell you theres nothing in any of the rumours of legal action being taken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoneWolf Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 Well I've now been into work again today after a few days off and I can honestly tell you theres nothing in any of the rumours of legal action being taken Well Im really surprised. You mean to tell me McRushToCourt's corporate lawyers have stopped confiding in front line burger friers ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
www.theislandinsider.co.uk Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Actually were a franchise, so their lawyers wouldnt have anything to do with it and im sorry, thank you for reminding me of my place in society I'll just sit here rubbing my "social anathema" tatoo then, i often forget its plastered across my forehead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoneWolf Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Actually were a franchise, so their lawyers wouldnt have anything to do with it and im sorry, thank you for reminding me of my place in society I'll just sit here rubbing my "social anathema" tatoo then, i often forget its plastered across my forehead Try not to forget it in future. Youd do much better to concentrate on perfecting your burger frying technique. The last time I ate a burger someone ended up posting a defamatory thread on an internet forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 By the way, condescending means to talk down to. Well lets face it, you should know.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoneWolf Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Am I being too condescending ? No. I think he should be grateful I deigned to answer him at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hboy Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Am I being too condescending ? No. I think he should be grateful I deigned to answer him at all. Ignore Ans. Thats him with the French horn! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Agitator Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Well I've now been into work again today after a few days off and I can honestly tell you theres nothing in any of the rumours of legal action being taken Well you shouldn't be divulging what goes on at your place of work Mr D! that includes mouthing off on here if there IS or ISNT anything going on. You have effectively broken your employers confidence – if I were your boss, I’d sack you on the spot. Good job you weren’t elected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.