Laws surrounding a rumour/gossip website? Might get in serious trouble!

[tamintl]

Hi everyone!

Just joined so be nice!

I was wondering if someone can help. Basically i have set up a niche website that posts rumours about an organisation. The organisation is the Scottish Golf Union. I live in Scotland myself BUT i host my site from the USA.

My question is: the organisation have warned that if i were to post any content that is detrimental to their image without suffient evidence then they are willing to take 'appropriate action.'
However i heard that they cannot track or get hold of my details as my site is hosted in the US and i live in the UK. Something to do with federal laws??

Does anyone have experience to say if i could get into serious trouble or is there nothing to worry about. I am also going to put a disclaimer on the site saying that all info is rumour etc etc..

Kind regards
Tam

 

[Bill Ryan]

Did you use a proxy ip to register here? Audit trail and all.

 

[Matt Gent]

well surely you will only be posting the truth which you can back up with evidence, so you should not have many problems

 

[vvaannmmaann]

As has been said,if what you wish to write is true then carry on.
If it is not.Find a good lawyer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation

 

[Atilla]

Why not try it and put the to the test.

You'll soon see if they are indeed true to their word.

 

[tamintl]

As has been said,if what you wish to write is true then carry on.
If it is not.Find a good lawyer.

Of course there will be some true statements, But the nature of my site is a gossip site where users can anonymously submit rumors, gossip to me to which i make articles on. I have also got a very clear disclaimer:

Quoting from my disclaimer:

******* is a website that offers news, results and rumours/rumors on golf and golfing bodies. ****** is classed as a golf gossip site which publishes rumors and conjecture in addition to accurately reported facts. Information on this site may or may not be true and ****** makes no warranty as to the validity of any claims. All content on ****** is based on rumours and speculation and we provide no guarantee to its accuracy. ****** takes no responsibility for consequences resulting from the content on our site.

Now to me this seems enough for me to run this webste.
What is your views?

Regards
tam

 

[ethical PR]

Libel is when the defamation is written; including in newspaper articles, discussion forums and websites.
In the UK, if someone thinks that what you wrote about them is either defamatory or damaging, the onus will be on you to prove that the comments are true in court. If you allow claims to be made on your website, you've got to prove that they are true.

It is not for the judge or jury to decide how damaging the libel may be- they just have to confirm that the accusations are false and damaging.
You cannot just write a disclaimer on your website, or register it outside the UK to try and avoid responsibility.
Speak to a lawyer who specialises in libel if you want to get a proper legal opinion on the matter.

 

[maxh]

Surely spreading rumours without evidence will impact on your karma?

It sounds like you want to profit from other peoples misfortune.

 

[mit74]

we all have freedom of speech and as with all newspapers they can express their views and possible rumours as much as they want, you obviously have to be careful what you say. I think they're trying to scare you.

 

[kulture]

we all have freedom of speech and as with all newspapers they can express their views and possible rumours as much as they want, you obviously have to be careful what you say. I think they're trying to scare you.

WRONG. Speak to a solicitor. Find out the facts. Freedom of speech does not allow you to publish Libel.

 

[Bruvver]

For the record anything I write here may or may not be correct, I am prone sometimes to veer from truth into gossip, sometimes for comedy effect, sometimes for the hell of it.So if you think anything I write is illegal, this disclaimer exonerates me from any personal blame.

tamintl is a *****r

That should save me............
Who else can I have a go at ?

 

[cjd]

If what is said is libellous you can be sued. In fact, our libel laws are now so onerous that people in other countries are coming here to sue because our laws are so severe. (google 'libel tourism')

More likely though, they will just tell your host to remove the site and they probably will because if they don't they then become liable too.

Additionally, unless you've got a spare £50,000, you can't defend an action anyway - right or wrong.

In other words it's a big risk.

 

[tamintl]

Libel is when the defamation is written; including in newspaper articles, discussion forums and websites.
In the UK, if someone thinks that what you wrote about them is either defamatory or damaging, the onus will be on you to prove that the comments are true in court. If you allow claims to be made on your website, you've got to prove that they are true.

It is not for the judge or jury to decide how damaging the libel may be- they just have to confirm that the accusations are false and damaging.
You cannot just write a disclaimer on your website, or register it outside the UK to try and avoid responsibility.
Speak to a lawyer who specialises in libel if you want to get a proper legal opinion on the matter.

Even if you announce and make clear on the article that the author/website/owner makes no judgement on the accuracy of the content and does not claim that the content is true. Is this still classed as libel? Kind regards
Tam

 

[mit74]

WRONG. Speak to a solicitor. Find out the facts. Freedom of speech does not allow you to publish Libel.

WRONG did I say you could publish libel in that post? As with all media you can publish what you want as long as it isn't libel! Read the whole post before making stupid conclusions.

 

[cjd]

Even if you announce and make clear on the article that the author/website/owner makes no judgement on the accuracy of the content and does not claim that the content is true. Is this still classed as libel?

Of course - you can't publish stuff that is libellous. No amount of disclaimers gets you off the hook.

 

[papverpoppies]

Of course there will be some true statements, But the nature of my site is a gossip site where users can anonymously submit rumors, gossip to me to which i make articles on. I have also got a very clear disclaimer:

Quoting from my disclaimer:

******* is a website that offers news, results and rumours/rumors on golf and golfing bodies. ****** is classed as a golf gossip site which publishes rumors and conjecture in addition to accurately reported facts. Information on this site may or may not be true and ****** makes no warranty as to the validity of any claims. All content on ****** is based on rumours and speculation and we provide no guarantee to its accuracy. ****** takes no responsibility for consequences resulting from the content on our site.

Now to me this seems enough for me to run this webste.
What is your views?

Regards
tam

Why on earth would you want to post tittle tattle and rumours, what would be the point?

Imagine if you read some made up trash about yourself on a website, or worse you family read it - how would you feel.

Is there not enough garbage out there, without inviting people to write in with lies and rumours.

Exposing the truth is one thing; but this is shabby.

Pops xx

 

[Bill Ryan]

It is clear that publishing a libelous statement is still libel even if it was not your original statement.

You would have to prove it was true and you would need evidence. If you can do this you may still have problems dealing with inuendo and inference that may be based on truth (e.g a certain football club owner spends too little on players (fact?) or he is a miser (inference)).

I think you would be taking a big gamble if you do this.

 

[tamintl]

Why on earth would you want to post tittle tattle and rumours, what would be the point?

Imagine if you read some made up trash about yourself on a website, or worse you family read it - how would you feel.

Is there not enough garbage out there, without inviting people to write in with lies and rumours.

Exposing the truth is one thing; but this is shabby.

Pops xx

Ive identified a niche market. A possible money maker. Its a dog eat dog world out there.

 

[tamintl]

Does anyone know if the organisation can take legal action due to the following deciding factor:

I host the website out of USA. However, the concerned party and myself are both from the uk. Does this mean that if they were to take legal action, it goes through the USA libel system or the UK libel system?

Because this makes a huge difference.

Kind regards
Tam

 

[Dawg]

Unless you have very deep pockets you are onto a hiding to nothing: if you piss them off they will screw you, if you don't piss them off you are being ineffectual: your choice.
If you want to go ahead follow someone like Guido's example. Set up an offshore nominee company in Nevis, register the domain there and use Wordpress.com. The good news is Wordpress.com is free. Setting up the nominee company etc will cost you well into 4 figures.
How much do you hate these players of a game?

 

[kulture]

WRONG did I say you could publish libel in that post? As with all media you can publish what you want as long as it isn't libel! Read the whole post before making stupid conclusions.

I did read your post. That's why I said it was wrong. I am sorry if you think my opinion is stupid, but I do not mind, I think your post was dangerously wrong. It would have the tendency to entourage the op to go ahead and set up a site where rumours and gossip are posted by third parties. Where no evidence is documented to back up the posts. The op thinks that just by having a disclaimer and by saying that it's not me who wrote this, that they can get away with this. Can I suggest that the op looks up demon vs Godfrey and then get proper legal advice.

 

[Psl]

I did read your post. That's why I said it was wrong. I am sorry if you think my opinion is stupid, but I do not mind, I think your post was dangerously wrong. It would have the tendency to entourage the op to go ahead and set up a site where rumours and gossip are posted by third parties. Where no evidence is documented to back up the posts. The op thinks that just by having a disclaimer and by saying that it's not me who wrote this, that they can get away with this. Can I suggest that the op looks up demon vs Godfrey and then get proper legal advice.

Well put. Perhaps mit74 should go halves on the costs for legal advice?

I think the site is very very bad idea and I hope it costs the OP a right few quid when he gets sued. There is too many sites and blogs etc out there full of B/S and lies that damage businesses.

 

[papverpoppies]

Well put. Perhaps mit74 should go halves on the costs for legal advice?

I think the site is very very bad idea and I hope it costs the OP a right few quid when he gets sued. There is too many sites and blogs etc out there full of B/S and lies that damage businesses.

Totally agree, but the poster seems to think - there is money to be made from this 'niche' market.

If justice is to serve, lets hope the money flows the other way if he goes ahead.

POPS XX

 

[captaincloser]

Ive identified a niche market. A possible money maker. Its a dog eat dog world out there.

Sorry to puncture your balloon but you have not identified either a money maker or a niche market. Court proceedings will follow pretty swiftly once you start 'gossiping' plus the audience will be tiny to follow this particular type of vendetta.

A dog eat dog world it may be ...but you are more likely to end up as the dogs dinner or at the very least some firm of lawyers' dinners for several months.

 

[cjd]

I host the website out of USA. However, the concerned party and myself are both from the uk. Does this mean that if they were to take legal action, it goes through the USA libel system or the UK libel system?

Because this makes a huge difference.

Kind regards
Tam

they can sue in either territory because the libel can be read and do damage in either territory.

Forget it.

 

[paulears]

It's probably still there on BBC i Player but the programme "See you in court" was quite revealing. The story was a property owner had a dispute with the management company who looked after the 3 floor freehold of his home. He posted what he felt were truthful comments on various property sites when people asked if this company was good. He said it was not. They asked him to remove them. He refused. They asked the site owner to remove them, and they did. They then took it to the High Court. No legal aid, and if he lost, the legal people thought maybe £250,000 would be the outcome. He lost! He asked for permission to appeal, it was refused. In the end, he found a legal expert willing to work for free if they lost - who loved weird and wonderful injustices like this. He got the case reviewed by the final arbiter, and got permission to appeal - and won!

Can you seriously afford this kind of 'law'. If they find you have libeled them, if they have the money and think it important, they'll take action.

See if you can find the programme and watch it again - then think if you want to take the risk. I'd also suggest that the internet source matters not a jot - after all, the date was sent from the UK to your server, so you can't exactly claim you didn't do it? I suppose you could move to the states and then claim UK law didn't count - but perhaps then US law might?

 

[papverpoppies]

Hi everyone!

Just joined so be nice!

I was wondering if someone can help. Basically i have set up a niche website that posts rumours about an organisation. The organisation is the Scottish Golf Union. I live in Scotland myself BUT i host my site from the USA.

My question is: the organisation have warned that if i were to post any content that is detrimental to their image without suffient evidence then they are willing to take 'appropriate action.'
However i heard that they cannot track or get hold of my details as my site is hosted in the US and i live in the UK. Something to do with federal laws??

Does anyone have experience to say if i could get into serious trouble or is there nothing to worry about. I am also going to put a disclaimer on the site saying that all info is rumour etc etc..

Kind regards
Tam

Considering what your thinking of doing your opening line; is a pearler.

Pops xx

 

[dannyjw]

Legally you should be fine if you are not the one posting this information yourself on these companies.

Check out this page on the whocallsme.com website
http://whocallsme.com/nb/legal.aspx

Quoted

This immunity is granted by the federal law called the Communications Decency Act or "CDA", 47 U.S.C. § 230, which says that "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."
Because the content on WhoCallsMe.com is authored by users of the site, we cannot be legally regarded as the "publisher or speaker" of the postings contained here, and hence we are not liable for the statements that others have written even if they contain false or inaccurate information.

Here is a link that will help you understand the law:

• http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/immunity-online-publishers-under-communications-decency-act

That's why it's nearly impossible for WhoCallsMe.com to lose a lawsuit. WhoCallsMe.com is immune from virtually every type of civil liability when it is sued based on information posted by a third party. If your lawyer claims otherwise, s/he is either incompetent or just wants to get some billable hours. Not only will you lose, it will very likely end up being very expensive for you because in addition to the fees you pay to your attorney, WhoCallsMe.com will not stipulate to a dismissal of the case unless the party who filed the suit agrees to pay all our attorney fees.




Hope this may help you

 

[papverpoppies]

Legally you should be fine if you are not the one posting this information yourself on these companies.

Check out this page on the whocallsme.com website
http://whocallsme.com/nb/legal.aspx

Quoted

This immunity is granted by the federal law called the Communications Decency Act or "CDA", 47 U.S.C. § 230, which says that "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."
Because the content on WhoCallsMe.com is authored by users of the site, we cannot be legally regarded as the "publisher or speaker" of the postings contained here, and hence we are not liable for the statements that others have written even if they contain false or inaccurate information.

Here is a link that will help you understand the law:

• http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/immunity-online-publishers-under-communications-decency-act

That's why it's nearly impossible for WhoCallsMe.com to lose a lawsuit. WhoCallsMe.com is immune from virtually every type of civil liability when it is sued based on information posted by a third party. If your lawyer claims otherwise, s/he is either incompetent or just wants to get some billable hours. Not only will you lose, it will very likely end up being very expensive for you because in addition to the fees you pay to your attorney, WhoCallsMe.com will not stipulate to a dismissal of the case unless the party who filed the suit agrees to pay all our attorney fees.




Hope this may help you

This information is based on American Law, the poster is in the UK, and I doubt they are the same.

Pops xxx

 

[dannyjw]

Yeah but I doubt the laws are going to be much different. Otherwise every British forum website would potentially be extremely vulnerable in a legal sense. Unless the law states in the UK that all forums must be fully moderated and monitored (which would be a mammoth job in many cases) then they will be protected in the same way as in the USA.

"While the administrators and moderators of this forum will attempt to remove or edit any generally objectionable material as quickly as possible, it is impossible to review every message. Therefore you acknowledge that all posts made to these forums express the views and opinions of the author and not the administrators, moderators or webmaster (except for posts by these people) and hence will not be held liable."

Above taken from the T's & C's of ukbusinessforums

 

[cjd]

Yeah but I doubt the laws are going to be much different. Otherwise every British forum website would potentially be extremely vulnerable in a legal sense.

Oh, good grief.........

 

[kulture]

Please read this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godfrey_v_Demon_Internet_Service

Demon found out to their cost (over £250,000) that British libel laws can and do apply just for hosting a post.

 

[paulears]

Ok - the VERY expensive QC on the BBC programme was wrong, and us non-lawyers are right. Publish and be damned. When you get the summons through the post, like the bloke in the programme did, just think - put your house on the market, live in a tent and keep the money to pay the legal costs and compensation.

It will be wigs and judges who make the decisions NOT random people on the net. If you post the material, and it damages them in any way - it's grounds for an action. If they warn you, like the man on TV, then they have tried to prevent you doing it, or like him, they gave him another chance to remove the damaging content, and thinking he was right - he ignored it. Damn scary. I have been a witness at the High Court in London and it is NOT like a criminal case, it's worse - and I was only a witness!

 

[Atilla]

Of all the organisations to pick a fight with, the SGU is probably not the one.
I may be wrong as it ain't my game, but i suspect they have access to more Lawyers than you can shake a stick at considering most golf club members lists are full of them.

Seems to me that some people are a danger to themselves.

 

[td2011]

I don't really understand why you would want to write rubbish about a club. If it was based on fact and you were trying to expose them for one reason or another then I might understand.
Either way I don't think you're in a good position.

 

[papverpoppies]

I don't really understand why you would want to write rubbish about a club. If it was based on fact and you were trying to expose them for one reason or another then I might understand.
Either way I don't think you're in a good position.

Perhaps they 'black balled' him, and he wants to get even - or is that par in golf?

Pops xx

 

[makeusvisible]

My advice would be get legal advice. You cannot trust what you are being told on a forum(s), as it is all here-say. You need to get facts. I see you have copy/pasted your message onto a lot of forums.....your going to get answers from people who know nothing, but think they know it all, and it is going to be really hard to sift out the useful from the useless.

If a big organisation is making statement like this already, be careful. The sort of money involved could be home, family and life changing should things turn sour.

Get legal advice!

 

[kulture]

Absolutely get legal advice. BUT whilst you are pondering and hopefully getting that advice, MAKE SURE that there are no posts on your site likely to cause them to take action.

Demon only had the post up 10 days after they were asked to remove it, and that proved costly.

 

[tamintl]

Interesting. In regards to my question about hosting the site in the USA.

I have just received a response from the technical team and they have said that they do not give out any details and that they throw out any requests for details from ANYONE besides a US-Court order. This suggests that they cannot do anything unless they get a US court order. Can a uk firm go trough us courts?

 

[Splashy]

[FONT=verdana, geneva, lucida, arial]tamintl[/FONT] give it up as a bad (very) idea.

As many other posters have pointed out the Libel Laws in the UK are quite wide ranging and potentially damaging to your pocket. Don't be mistaken in reading Internet tittle tattle that you cannot be summonsed, you can and you will.

The fact that some US companies make it difficult to trace the owner of online content will not deter a good UK law firm who will find your ID and then send a lovely man around with a summons, ignore that at your peril

Again as someone has pointed out it is a bad idea to take on the SGU, who I would bet good money on, have at least one decent solicitor or barrister among their number.

Quite apart from it being a bad idea, just where is the business in posting defamatory remarks?