Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Removing the MCD stickies...

2

Comments

  • #32
    johnnyskeleton
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,463 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    Boston wrote: »
    I think a lot of people would take defamation to mean any negative comment. I understood it to mean negative and false, however your post suggested you where referring to any simply negative comment. I also fail to see how this isn't related to the MCD-events policy, since that is the subject of the topic. Perhaps you'd care to explain yourself more fully?

    Where in my post did I suggest that I was referring to any simply negative comment. I think you were reading something into my words which was not there.

    Equally I never said that it wasn't related to the MCD policy, my point was that even though the blanket ban on mentioning MCD has been removed, that should not prevent the general rules of the various fora from being enforced. Most fora don't allow defamatory comments, and this would apply irrespective of who is being talked about.


  • #33
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    johnnyskeleton wrote: »
    Where in my post did I suggest that I was referring to any simply negative comment. I think you were reading something into my words which was not there.

    Take my post as more of a question asking in what sense you meant the word. I admitted I found your post confusing.
    johnnyskeleton wrote: »
    Equally I never said that it wasn't related to the MCD policy, my point was that even though the blanket ban on mentioning MCD has been removed, that should not prevent the general rules of the various fora from being enforced. Most fora don't allow defamatory comments, and this would apply irrespective of who is being talked about.

    As per post 28, I agree with your sentiment. Can we drop this debate on the semantics of defamation now that we appear to be in agreement? I find it terribly trying.


  • #34
    My name is URL
    Registered Users Posts: 25,057 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    johnnyskeleton wrote: »
    Where in my post did I suggest that I was referring to any simply negative comment. I think you were reading something into my words which was not there.

    Equally I never said that it wasn't related to the MCD policy, my point was that even though the blanket ban on mentioning MCD has been removed, that should not prevent the general rules of the various fora from being enforced. Most fora don't allow defamatory comments, and this would apply irrespective of who is being talked about.

    So what's defamation in regards to a company like MCD, which is diverse to say the least?

    If I decide to post a negative review or complaint about an MCD event will it be deemed as libelous?

    Will it then be up to a mod to decide whether or not it is, or will be be MCD (which has already proven itself to be a litigious conglomerate) that dictates what is fair discussion?

    This is a forum, where many people express individual views on things.

    It seems more appropriate and fairer to members to set out clear definitions as to what the change in rules means for a poster on this board (or ban outright the discussion of MCD), rather than use a loose rule-set which favors positive discussion


  • #35
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Well from a user prospective, start by not posting anything which is false. You're not going to get ridged definition of what will be censored, it has to be a judgment call. The question is, it be a strict policy of will the user be given the benefit of the doubt?


  • #36
    Sully
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    I'd have assumed if you post a negative comment as an opinion, rather then a fact, its not libel. Libel seems to be for factual negative remarks.

    The point is, while the blanket ban on MCD is lifted, you now treat them like any other group when posting about them. There is no difference, the only change is you can discuss MCD related events now.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    turgon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,762 ✭✭✭turgon


    Tbh if you want to play is safe just throw in "allegedly" and "apparently" every now and again.


  • #38
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,233 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    My name is URL wrote: »
    So what's defamation in regards to a company like MCD, which is diverse to say the least?

    Saying that Pope Benedict was a nazi and he murdered millions of Jews would be defamation. Saying that in 1943 while still in seminary, he was drafted at age 16 into the German anti-aircraft corps is not defamation.

    For a business saying that they sell shoddy goods (without good cause) would be defamation. Saying that you bought some shoes from a shop and they fell apart after a week of normal use, is not defamation (assuming they they fell apart after a week of normal use).

    Stick to the facts.


  • #39
    IRLConor
    Subscribers Posts: 4,075 ✭✭✭IRLConor


    Victor wrote: »
    Stick to the facts.

    And be wary of that too.

    Truth is a defence, not an absolute out. If you say "XYZ ate my babies" then they can still take you to court and you then have to use evidence that they did eat your babies to avoid losing the case. That's not really a great option if you can't afford a High Court case.


  • #40
    Terry
    Registered Users Posts: 26,061 ✭✭✭✭Terry


    Richard Dower wrote: »
    So it's now OK to say that MCD are scumbags...right?, or is that libel?
    That could very well be construed as libel as there is no premise behind it.
    That is also my entire knowledge of these laws and is something I will act immediately on if it pops up in AH.

    turgon wrote: »
    Tbh if you want to play is safe just throw in "allegedly" and "apparently" every now and again.

    Doesn't work.
    I got pulled up on that a few years back.

    Don't ask me to explain how it doesn't work because I don't fully understand it, but all I know is that it doesn't cover you.


  • #41
    johnnyskeleton
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,463 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    My name is URL wrote:
    Will it then be up to a mod to decide whether or not it is, or will be be MCD (which has already proven itself to be a litigious conglomerate) that dictates what is fair discussion?

    Yes, a mod. Bear in mind that if a mod, for whatever reason, decides that there should be no discussion of anything in a fora, then you, as a user, must either abide by that rule or not post there.
    My name is URL wrote:
    This is a forum, where many people express individual views on things.

    It's their site, not ours, and we must abide by their rules.
    My name is URL wrote:
    It seems more appropriate and fairer to members to set out clear definitions as to what the change in rules means for a poster on this board (or ban outright the discussion of MCD), rather than use a loose rule-set which favors positive discussion

    Well look, you either abide by the Irish laws as regards defamation or you don't. It's that simple.
    Victor wrote: »
    Saying that Pope Benedict was a nazi and he murdered millions of Jews would be defamation. Saying that in 1943 while still in seminary, he was drafted at age 16 into the German anti-aircraft corps is not defamation.

    For a business saying that they sell shoddy goods (without good cause) would be defamation. Saying that you bought some shoes from a shop and they fell apart after a week of normal use, is not defamation (assuming they they fell apart after a week of normal use).

    Stick to the facts.

    Exactly, with the caveat that it is up to each individual moderator to say what is potentially defamatory and what is not. I think moderators should err on the side of removing anything that is potentially defamatory if in any doubt, as it is the only way to run a site like this.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Irish Halo
    Registered Users Posts: 1,429 ✭✭✭Irish Halo


    So MCD are still taking Boards to court and Boards is again giving them free advertising/promotion?

    I understand that MCD dominate the promotions scene in Ireland and not being able to discuss events promoted by them makes things hard for users but they are in the process of trying to hurt the community with a court case that could potentially see Boards and the community disappear so why should we discuss their events?

    Just me 2 cent.


  • #43
    turgon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,762 ✭✭✭turgon


    Asfaik in common law systems, one case sets a precedents for the next. So in deciding verdicts judges will often go back to previous cases and see what happened there. You might be able to refer to previous cases in your defence I think.

    So the case DeVore refered to might set a precedent for the MCD vs Boards one. I didnt go through it but theres probably something in there that could be used to defend Boards.

    Maybe someone with legal know-how could clarify/dismiss that as necessary.


  • #44
    Darragh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,241 ✭✭✭Darragh


    Hi all

    Thanks for all the questions and feedback.

    My understanding of this whole MCD ban-lift is this:

    Talk about the gigs. If a gig is bad, say why the gig was bad, but as was said earlier, stick to the facts.

    Here are our legal and defamation guidelines. They apply to every person/company/event/organisation/charity/official body and so on that is discussed on Boards.ie

    If anyone comes to us and says "This post is a problem and here's why", we have a set process of dealing with it. People can use the "Report a post" function or the Contact Page to bring it to the attention of the moderators, who will then escalate it to the admins if necessary.

    We look at the post, judge whether it's (excuse my phrasing) "fair comment" or a post that is written to cause trouble, with clearly wrong or unprovable facts or something more serious, and what action needs to be taken.

    If the subject of the post can say "Here's what's said on Boards.ie and here's the truth of the matter", then it's only fair that we do what we can to ensure the truth of the situation is known.

    There are rules and guidelines on Boards.ie. We fully reserve the right to implement those rules as and how we see fit.

    Re MCD, as Sully said below:
    The point is, while the blanket ban on MCD is lifted, you now treat them like any other group when posting about them. There is no difference, the only change is you can discuss MCD related events now.

    I hope that helps. If there are any questions we can answer (once we're back in the office) please let us know.

    Thanks

    Darragh


  • #45
    ShooterSF
    Registered Users Posts: 8,824 ✭✭✭ShooterSF


    Yeah! Take that McDonalds.


  • #46
    Slutmonkey57b
    Registered Users Posts: 5,552 ✭✭✭Slutmonkey57b


    On the one hand I'm a little bit glad to see the lift on discussion of MCD events but equally I'm slightly in favour of leaving them out in the cold with no free promotion or word of mouth. I'm also wary about the massive increase in the number of posts about Britney Spears and other such musical garbage (garbage in my opinion.)


  • #47
    hullaballoo
    Administrators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,707 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭hullaballoo


    Ok, the issue is slightly conflated and I want to clear something up.

    On the one hand, there has been a decision in the High Court that is very very positive for the digital rights movement in Ireland. Particularly, it means that the discussion forum/chat room format is shielded (note: not immune) from anti-freedom of speech attacks.


    On the other hand, as an almost entirely separate issue, boards.ie has re-considered its position in relation to the MCD issue. They are now simply being treated as any other company on this site would be treated. Their pedestal has been taken from under them. Basically, the publicity boards.ie was giving MCD as a result of the ban was far more than they would have gotten had this all happened quietly. Now, we can just go back to the default position in relation to all companies. That is discussion = good. Defamation = bad (at least, it will be removed where it's brought to our attention).



    One other thing I want to clear up and I've been at the head of a one-man campaign on boards in relation to this issue: fair comment/truth/justification/opinion are defences in a court case against a claim of defamation. Successfully pleading a defence doesn't necessarily mean that the words complained of are not defamatory. They're separate issues for the jury to decide (yes, jury, not judge).


  • #48
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    hullaballoo wrote: »
    One other thing I want to clear up and I've been at the head of a one-man campaign on boards in relation to this issue: fair comment/truth/justification/opinion are defences in a court case against a claim of defamation. Successfully pleading a defence doesn't necessarily mean that the words complained of are not defamatory. They're separate issues for the jury to decide (yes, jury, not judge).

    So negative comment can be defamation, even if its the truth?


  • #49
    hullaballoo
    Administrators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,707 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭hullaballoo


    Boston wrote: »
    So negative comment can be defamation, even if its the truth?
    Very much so.


  • #50
    5starpool
    Subscribers Posts: 32,846 ✭✭✭✭5starpool


    As someone said:

    The law is an ass.


  • #51
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    5starpool wrote: »
    As someone said:

    The law is an ass.

    I own the rights to that phrase, I'm suing you for trademark infringement.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    Decker Tasteless Queue
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,944 ✭✭✭✭ Decker Tasteless Queue


    hullaballoo wrote: »
    Very much so.

    That's just silly.


  • #53
    johnnyskeleton
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,463 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    hullaballoo wrote: »
    Ok, the issue is slightly conflated and I want to clear something up.

    On the one hand, there has been a decision in the High Court that is very very positive for the digital rights movement in Ireland. Particularly, it means that the discussion forum/chat room format is shielded (note: not immune) from anti-freedom of speech attacks.

    I'd say it merely clarified what was already generally believed to be the case.
    hullaballoo wrote: »
    One other thing I want to clear up and I've been at the head of a one-man campaign on boards in relation to this issue: fair comment/truth/justification/opinion are defences in a court case against a claim of defamation. Successfully pleading a defence doesn't necessarily mean that the words complained of are not defamatory.

    Has fair comment been accepted by our courts?
    hullaballoo wrote: »
    They're separate issues for the jury to decide (yes, jury, not judge).

    Provided it's over €38k's worth of defamation.


  • #54
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    johnnyskeleton wrote: »
    Has fair comment been accepted by our courts?

    According to this, yes Do you disagree, if so why so?


  • #55
    hullaballoo
    Administrators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,707 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭hullaballoo


    This thread is becoming a little silly in itself. If you want to discuss the finer points of defamation law, there's a forum for it.

    The law isn't an exact science, but more of an art (the same way English and Politics are). I'm trying my hardest on this site to make sure everyone's aware of the implication of what is said here. I can't be any more precise than I have been already and I don't want the issues made more difficult by over-analysis. If there's a question in relation to any legal aspects on the site, anyone can contact me or any mods with Judges' Chambers [Legal Issues] in their profile and we'll be happy to assist.


  • #56
    Queen-Mise
    Registered Users Posts: 7,462 ✭✭✭Queen-Mise


    That MCD ban discussion has been in existance for as long as I have been on boards. So it is good to see it gone.

    Really did seeem a bit like censorship (obviously not boards.ie fault), and I have really problems with censorship.


  • #57
    hussey
    Registered Users Posts: 6,240 ✭✭✭hussey


    DeVore wrote: »
    we are removing the MCD stickies and allowing discussion of MCD events.

    DeV.

    Bloody thanks-whore ;)


  • #58
    Decker Tasteless Queue
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,944 ✭✭✭✭ Decker Tasteless Queue


    I've noticed that a certain music festival's name and misspelled element has been swear filtered out. Just thought you might like to know.


  • #59
    eVeNtInE
    Registered Users Posts: 7,020 ✭✭✭eVeNtInE


    This post has been deleted.


  • #60
    drzhivago
    Registered Users Posts: 926 ✭✭✭drzhivago


    DeVore wrote: »
    Due to recent High Court rulings, http://bit.ly/13hkfh , we are removing the MCD stickies and allowing discussion of MCD events.

    There still exists a pending court case between MCD and Boards.ie and
    I would like to remind you all that it is a contempt to court to discuss any current case (MCD related or otherwise) so please do NOT do that.

    Normal libel laws still apply and we will remove that which is brought to our attention as per our requirements under that ruling. Please do not libel anyone.

    Thanks for your time and attention

    DeV.

    linked to the cae but it is about BETFAIR
    was that the correct link


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    drzhivago wrote: »
    linked to the cae but it is about BETFAIR
    was that the correct link

    Yes. The case centered around an Irish internet "chatroom";


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement