Bombertalk

Why is everyone so scared or unwilling to mention players names they have heard ?

Doctor-patient confidentiality.

As far as I know the club was named and that is it. Everyone is assuming that 7 would name the players, because of the Michael Braun isue. Eventhough 7 named Braun as the guy Akermanis accused ot using drugs, which is different.

nathanskinner wrote:Why is everyone so scared or unwilling to mention players names they have heard ?

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.

pear wrote:

nathanskinner wrote:Why is everyone so scared or unwilling to mention players names they have heard ?

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.

Oh wouldn't we!!!!

ahhh i understand, thanks for clearing that up. I figured these places were fair game to drop rumours etc. Cheers!

Cant you just say who its not?

Cant you just say who its not?

Havn't been on the computer for a couple days, and all the forums and pages that mentioned the names of the 'accused' drug users/dealers have been removed. Argh!

Oh, and the injunction has been extended.

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.

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.

Absolutely untrue.

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.

Staggy wrote:

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.

Absolutely untrue.

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?

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.

Staggy wrote:

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.

Absolutely untrue.

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.

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.

ZRS wrote:

Staggy wrote:

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.

Absolutely untrue.

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.

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.

True, but the problem is that you don't actually know whether it is fact or not. That's the point.

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.