(accused drug taking) Players...?
-
- Top Up Player
- Posts: 120
- Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 12:55 am
(accused drug taking) Players...?
Why is everyone so scared or unwilling to mention players names they have heard ?
-
- High Draft Pick
- Posts: 868
- Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 4:37 pm
Re: Hawthorn Players...?
Because there is an injunction against any media outlet publishing these details and although the issue of chatrooms is a grey area within law, none of us here would want to see our dedicated admins and mods getting into any personal legal problems on behalf of forum members.nathanskinner wrote:Why is everyone so scared or unwilling to mention players names they have heard ?
Bleeding for the red and black
Re: Hawthorn Players...?
Oh wouldn't we!!!!pear wrote:Because there is an injunction against any media outlet publishing these details and although the issue of chatrooms is a grey area within law, none of us here would want to see our dedicated admins and mods getting into any personal legal problems on behalf of forum members.nathanskinner wrote:Why is everyone so scared or unwilling to mention players names they have heard ?
-
- Top Up Player
- Posts: 120
- Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 12:55 am
- Windy_Hill
- Champion of Essendon
- Posts: 12859
- Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:23 pm
- Windy_Hill
- Champion of Essendon
- Posts: 12859
- Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:23 pm
Absolutely untrue.j-mac wrote:A media expert was quoted in the Age yesterday, saying that the AFL is pretty much powerless to take action against internet forums. Obviously ones with official links to clubs can be sanctioned, but from my reading of it, there is nothing they can do to us.
There would possibly be an action in defamation (against individual users) if you choose to name names.
Publishing material on an internet bulletin board has been held by Australian courts to be considered 'publishing' for the purposes of defamation.
Don't do it.
Source?Staggy wrote:Absolutely untrue.j-mac wrote:A media expert was quoted in the Age yesterday, saying that the AFL is pretty much powerless to take action against internet forums. Obviously ones with official links to clubs can be sanctioned, but from my reading of it, there is nothing they can do to us.
There would possibly be an action in defamation (against individual users) if you choose to name names.
Publishing material on an internet bulletin board has been held by Australian courts to be considered 'publishing' for the purposes of defamation.
Don't do it.
The Age article quoted the judges findings which explicitly created a distinction between professional media organisations and internet forums.
What would be the amount of financial damage a plaintiff could claim from a random internet poster for defamation? $5?
Sorry Staggy but I think you`re dead wrong here mate.
if someone where to publish on this forum the actual players mentioned in the medical information then no defamation case to answer as it is fact. they may however be in breach of the court injunction supressing the identity of the players, as such any individual, and perhaps the administrators (as publishers) may be liable for this breach.Staggy wrote:Absolutely untrue.j-mac wrote:A media expert was quoted in the Age yesterday, saying that the AFL is pretty much powerless to take action against internet forums. Obviously ones with official links to clubs can be sanctioned, but from my reading of it, there is nothing they can do to us.
There would possibly be an action in defamation (against individual users) if you choose to name names.
Publishing material on an internet bulletin board has been held by Australian courts to be considered 'publishing' for the purposes of defamation.
Don't do it.
48.2 sismis to ZRS, SIX, ???!!! Its coming towards the commentary box Im leaving!!!
48.3 sismis to ZRS, FOUR, Who needs Bradman when weve got ZRS
48.4 sismis to ZRS, FOUR, Brillian cover drive by ZRS
48.6 sismis to ZRS, SIX, Display of Raw power and brutality by ZRS
48.3 sismis to ZRS, FOUR, Who needs Bradman when weve got ZRS
48.4 sismis to ZRS, FOUR, Brillian cover drive by ZRS
48.6 sismis to ZRS, SIX, Display of Raw power and brutality by ZRS
True, but the problem is that you don't actually know whether it is fact or not. That's the point.ZRS wrote:if someone where to publish on this forum the actual players mentioned in the medical information then no defamation case to answer as it is fact. they may however be in breach of the court injunction supressing the identity of the players, as such any individual, and perhaps the administrators (as publishers) may be liable for this breach.Staggy wrote:Absolutely untrue.j-mac wrote:A media expert was quoted in the Age yesterday, saying that the AFL is pretty much powerless to take action against internet forums. Obviously ones with official links to clubs can be sanctioned, but from my reading of it, there is nothing they can do to us.
There would possibly be an action in defamation (against individual users) if you choose to name names.
Publishing material on an internet bulletin board has been held by Australian courts to be considered 'publishing' for the purposes of defamation.
Don't do it.
and BiJ - you're right, the injunction doesn't apply to internet forums, but they are relevant in a defamation case, and publication on an internet forum is taken to be exactly the same as publication in a newspaper etc. The case is Gutnick v Dow Jones, and its been upheld since then.