Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Could you be sued over something you said on Boards.ie?

245

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,798 ✭✭✭✭DrumSteve


    Biggins wrote: »
    Your ass is mine! :D

    I'm a coming ...munch ...munch ...:pac:

    Durty.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,378 ✭✭✭Krieg


    Yeah, if you can back it up.

    Berkut has a good example in his sig

    The term "In my opinion..." is a fantastic get-out clause, though I wonder if it works in the legal world?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,553 ✭✭✭Banned Account


    For defamation to be actionable, it has to be false. One cannot be sued for making at true statement.

    Biggins - take your medicine - butt muncher.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,645 ✭✭✭Daemos


    IMO the only time someone sues over something said is when they know it's true and it's hit a nerve

    In which case I say all the better, because if we start censoring the truth because it paints someone in a bad light, we might as well just hire the Gestapo as our police.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,559 ✭✭✭✭AnonoBoy


    Things like X, Y or Z celebrity is a bit of a gobsh*te are opinion really aren't they? Can Twink sue me for saying she's not very nice? I hope not.

    However if I said Gay Byrne bought a house from me and never paid me th 400,000 euro he owes me then he could sue me for that as it's not true and defamatory to him.

    So I tend not to say things on boards (or any website) that I wouldn't stand over in court. That's the way it should be I think.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,217 ✭✭✭✭m5ex9oqjawdg2i


    Yes, we should be able to say it once it is true, which is next to impossible to prove.

    I mean, if we were to get sued over something we said about a company or politician*, and if that were to be true, then they could get away with murder. It's shutting people up who can damage them, which is complete bollix...

    *I wonder if they will try legislate to prevent their names from being damaged, especially when it's due... baxtards...


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 12,810 Mod ✭✭✭✭Keano


    Attack the post not the poster...thems are the rules Mr Ahern.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,553 ✭✭✭Banned Account


    AnonoBoy wrote: »
    However if I said Gay Byrne bought a house from me and never paid me th 400,000 euro he owes me then he could sue me for that as it's not true and defamatory to him.

    Think you're getting mixed up with Pat Kenny;)

    Defmation is the publication of a false statement which tends to lower the reputaion of the subject in the eyes of right-minded members of the public.

    Or words to that effect. Irish Libel laws are draconian and the awards are crazy.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,369 ✭✭✭✭ejmaztec


    Some people say stuff, which they believe to be true, then discover that they've picked the wrong person. A Michael Daly was being accused of Nama related dirty-doings recently, by a politics.ie poster, specifying that this particular Michael Daly was based in Tralee. As it turned out, the correct Michael Daly was a Limerick guy, who had absolutely feck all to do with Tralee, or any of the businesses named. It was destined for a court hearing, but a Politics.ie apology seemed to suffice at the last minute.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 81,060 ✭✭✭✭biko


    I would love for posters to be able to say whatever they like but some stuff grind my gears, for instance "Avoid like the plague" about some restaurant instead of giving a good account of why they personally didn't like that restaurant.

    People are inclined to shield themselves and one way to do this is to post on boards instead of bringing it up with the management of the establishment.
    I guess it's only natural to grin and bear it at the time but then want to get your comeuppance anyway.

    It's easy to sling mud from the shadows ;)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,787 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    On facebook and twitter it's a little different it's your account with your friends and picture attached to it, it's a bit more personal than boards where we're all sort of anonymous.

    As long as it's not an unfounded personal attack which is against the law as it is I don't see any problems.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 959 ✭✭✭ZeRoY


    Darragh wrote: »
    Should you have the freedom to say what you want about companies and people, as long as it's true?

    Of course ... who is surprised at this? Anyone can sue someone for defamation - on the internet is no different. It is however a lot more challenging as the request for ISPs/Website Owner to give out IP/Customer Data details has to be from a Court Order or a Super-Intendant at the minimum!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Darragh wrote: »
    Should you have the freedom to say what you want about companies and people, as long as it's true?

    Darragh

    Absolutely. And in particular politicians, including nastly little populist gobshites like Mr Ahern and his dollar accepting namesake.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,645 ✭✭✭Daemos


    Attack the post not the poster...thems are the rules Mr Ahern.
    Haha, I'd like to see that argument being brought up in court

    "Mr Keano, what made you think you could claim that Mr Cowen had intercourse with you?"

    "Themz the rules"


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,559 ✭✭✭✭AnonoBoy


    Think you're getting mixed up with Pat Kenny;)

    I just made up an example off the top of my head. Forgot about the Bull McCabe/Pat Kenny court case. :o


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,572 ✭✭✭✭brummytom


    The following people are homosexual: David Cameron, Nick Clegg, the whole of the British Cabinet, Trevor McDonald, Mary McAleese, George Murphy, all members of Birmingham City Football Club, Al Murray, David Beckham, Simon Cowell, Gordon Ramsey, Piers Morgan, Brad Pitt, Brian Cowen.




    Bring it


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,553 ✭✭✭Banned Account


    brummytom wrote: »
    The following people are homosexual: David Cameron, Nick Clegg, the whole of the British Cabinet, Trevor McDonald, Mary McAleese, George Murphy, Al Murray, David Beckham, Simon Cowell, Piers Morgan, Brad Pitt, Brian Cowen.




    Bring it

    you forgot David Norris


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    If it turns out cowell isn't gay, then I'd worry.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    The Justice Minister Dermot Ahern says social media sites are not exempt from the state's defamation laws.
    He made the remarks at the launch of the annual report of the Press Council which received 351 complaints last year, 200 of which presented evidence of a possible breach of the Code of Practice.
    But Minister Ahern says its not just newspapers who must be careful what they print.

    I think Mr Ahern might be quietly thinking about Harney and the allegations by a famous female Irish writer.
    Within minutes, her very words were posted into social sites. Ahern might be partly afraid that his like might be next!

    Say Mr X was robbing the state coffers. Post that on a site anywhere and unless you back it up, expect to be sued - and that is only right.

    HOWEVER - if one was to say "I have suspicions about someone unnamed and state money" - one must at the very least equally say what has aroused your suspicions!

    Adding a specific name to a too general allegation is not good.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    you forgot David Norris

    He's not gay, he's protestant.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Biggins wrote: »

    HOWEVER - if one was to say "I have suspicions about someone unnamed and state money" - one must at the very least equally say what has aroused your suspicions!

    Adding a specific name to a too general allegation is not good.

    How does that work with "I think Mr Ahern is a gobshite"


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,572 ✭✭✭✭brummytom


    Nodin wrote: »
    He's not gay, he's protestant.
    Is there a difference?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    Nodin wrote: »
    How does that work with "I think Mr Ahern is a gobshite"

    "I think Mr Ahern is a gobshite because..."

    The latter might be deemed "fair comment"
    The other (former) is a try to state something opinionated as fact in print. It might be true but the onus is on the typist to prove it or the walls of a court room they might see!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,559 ✭✭✭✭AnonoBoy


    Nodin wrote: »
    How does that work with "I think Mr Ahern is a gobshite"

    That's opinion. As far as I'm aware, you can say that freely........


    ..... can't you? :o


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,787 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    you forgot David Norris
    Isn't he some form of red neck from the US?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,553 ✭✭✭Banned Account


    In the indo Friday November 24 2006

    THE archaic nature of our libel laws was exposed again last night after multi-millionaire businessman Denis O'Brien was awarded record damages of €750,000. The award against the Mirror Newspaper Group by 11 jurors in the High Court is the highest in the history of the state for a defamation action.
    But the jury was never told the Supreme Court had rejected an earlier award of £250,000 (€317,000) granted to Mr O'Brien by another jury six years ago.
    The Supreme Court described that award as excessive, and said the libel against Mr O'Brien could not be regarded as "coming within the grossest and most serious libels which have come before the courts".
    It then sent the case back to the High Court on the issue of damages only but rejected an appeal by the Mirror to allow future juries to be given guidance on the amount of damages.
    As a result, the new jury nearly trebled the award rejected by the Supreme Court, leading to calls last night for reform of Ireland's defamation laws. Frank Cullen, director of the National Newspapers of Ireland, described the award as "staggering".
    He said: "The award clearly illustrates once again the need to reform our archaic libel laws and, as illustrated by this case, to provide mechanisms for judges to give guidance to juries on the level of damages to be awarded."
    Irish Secretary of the NUJ, Seamus Dooley, said the ruling appeared excessively punitive.
    "The amount appears disproportionate to the damage caused given the size of the circulation of the Irish Mirror, which is relatively small," he said.
    Mr O'Brien, who had gone to court after an article appeared in the Irish Daily Mirror eight years ago, was visibly emotional as the jury gave its decision. Afterwards, he said: "I am vindicated. This case has been going on since 1998. It was an outrageous libel and I am happy to have been vindicated."
    It is now highly likely that the Mirror Group will appeal the level of damages to the Supreme Court.
    Before yesterday, the highest award for libel was IR£300,000 paid to former Democratic Left leader Proinsias De Rossa.
    In April of this year the Mirror Group admitted that the article published over three pages in June 1998 was untrue and defamatory of Mr O'Brien.
    The article had alleged that former government minister Ray Burke was to be investigated for a third alleged payment of Ir£30,000. The newspaper referred to an anonymous letter which alleged the donation came from "top radio boss Denis O'Brien".
    During the three-day hearing, Mr O'Brien said he never gave money to Mr Burke. He also said he never bribed former Communications Minister Michael Lowry or any politician.
    Counsel for the newspaper group Eoin McCullough SC said it was an "extremely high award" and he asked for a stay on the award in the event of an appeal.
    Ms Justice Elizabeth Dunne said she would put a stay on the award providing there was a payout of €250,000, which she said was like the previous award but it had a "nice ring to it".
    The Mirror Group's legal adviser in Ireland, James O'Leary, said the newspaper group was very disappointed with the level of the award. He said the damages highlighted the urgent need for libel reform. Mr O'Brien had initiated proceedings against Mirror Group Newspapers and the then editor-in-chief of the Daily Mirror, Piers Morgan, and the then editor of the Irish Mirror Neil Leslie as a result of the publication in June 1998.
    In April this year the Mirror Group admitted the article was untrue and was defamatory of Mr O'Brien.
    In his closing speech, Mr McCullough urged the jury to bring in extremely small damages.
    He asked the jury to reflect on the nature of a mountainside conversation between Mr O'Brien and then Esat chief executive Barry Maloney in 1996 where it is alleged Mr O'Brien said he had paid IR£100,000 each to Mr Lowry and an unnamed person.
    "If you conclude what Denis O'Brien meant was he made an improper payment in connection with the licence then it is going to be very difficult to conclude he is entitled to damages."
    As regards a possible payment to charity from the award, Mr McCullough said the case could not be assessed as a newspaper having to pay damages to charity.
    Counsel for Mr O'Brien, Hugh Mohan SC, said the Mirror Group had sought to complicate what was a simple case. He said there was no suggestion Mr O'Brien is corrupt or involved in corrupt practices.

    This shows the full extent of the silliness


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,340 ✭✭✭Thoie


    Just to clarify, I can't say "Never ever go to that restaurant, they're the worst ever", but I can say "I'm never going back to that restaurant. I had to wait 2 hours for my order to be taken, they brought me the wrong thing twice, and when the right thing came it was so undercooked that it was a health hazard. The staff were rude when I complained." ? On the proviso that that was what had happened.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,553 ✭✭✭Banned Account


    ScumLord wrote: »
    Isn't he some form of red neck from the US?

    That's Chuck Norris - he's Davids brother:pac:


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    Thoie wrote: »
    Just to clarify, I can't say "Never ever go to that restaurant, they're the worst ever", but I can say "I'm never going back to that restaurant. I had to wait 2 hours for my order to be taken, they brought me the wrong thing twice, and when the right thing came it was so undercooked that it was a health hazard. The staff were rude when I complained." ? On the proviso that that was what had happened.
    Well put.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 19,242 Mod ✭✭✭✭L.Jenkins


    While defamation laws are there for print and such sites as facebook. Its the same for radio, even community radio. It's like walking on eggshells. Pain in the hole really, but necessary.


Advertisement
Advertisement