Coker....legal

Status
Not open for further replies.
I get that people are curious, but is it really worth getting the panties in a bunch to find out OMGRIGHTAWAYIHAVETOKNOWNOW?
 
herbyhawk said:
i got tired of being bagged on for my sentences looking like they are a run on so i just seperate them makes it easier to read
no offense on the question
in todays colleges, plagerism is a kiss of death
Click to expand...

Not trying to be a d***, but is there a reason you can't type in complete sentences and use punctuation?
 
JonDMiller said:
How about this..you create an account with your real name. Someone will send you the rumor, and you post it, with your name and where you work. In the event that what you heard doesn't turn out to be 100% factual, and someone comes to sue you for libel, I will have that information handy so that I can be sure to give you full credit, and liability.

Deal?
Click to expand...

Who could turn down a deal like THAT?
 
Mostly a lurker on here, but I do want to say that you guys have a faulty understanding of what libel is. The crux of the majority of libel suits come down to whether the writer/publisher knew or should have known that what was said about the injured was false. Restating a rumor that you have heard, unless you have good reason to believe that it is not true, is not libel. The other part of a libel suit is proving damages. Even if you are intentionally spreading false rumors, nothing will come from it unless the victim can show injury that will sustain a verdict of more than nominal damages.

Also, a D1 collegiate football player's expectation of privacy, and thus his ability to sue for libel, even against knowingly false statements, is severely limited by the 1st amendment.

I am not saying that the forum rules against unsubstantiated rumors is a bad thing. But if the reason for it is because you want to limit your liability, you have no need to worry. Spreading rumors is not libelous unless you intentionally spread something you know or should know to be false.
 
SamBrownlee48 said:
Mostly a lurker on here, but I do want to say that you guys have a faulty understanding of what libel is. The crux of the majority of libel suits come down to whether the writer/publisher knew or should have known that what was said about the injured was false. Restating a rumor that you have heard, unless you have good reason to believe that it is not true, is not libel. The other part of a libel suit is proving damages. Even if you are intentionally spreading false rumors, nothing will come from it unless the victim can show injury that will sustain a verdict of more than nominal damages.

Also, a D1 collegiate football player's expectation of privacy, and thus his ability to sue for libel, even against knowingly false statements, is severely limited by the 1st amendment.

I am not saying that the forum rules against unsubstantiated rumors is a bad thing. But if the reason for it is because you want to limit your liability, you have no need to worry. Spreading rumors is not libelous unless you intentionally spread something you know or should know to be false.
Click to expand...

This is what I was asking about. Would have surprised me that reporting a rumor as a rumor would have been libelous, but I'm not a lawyer.

In the end, it doesn't matter. Jon can manage this site however he wants based on the old "my house, my rules" adage.
 
Sigh... Just speculation, if Coker should end up being off the team (pending what this is all about), we will be extremely inexperienced at that position yet again in 2012.

If I'm not mistaken, 2008 was the last year we've had experience in our running game.. and have been starting freshmen or sophs at that position ever since. The turnover at that position is starting to become troubling.
 
1977Hawkeye said:
Sigh... Just speculation, if Coker should end up being off the team (pending what this is all about), we will be extremely inexperienced at that position yet again in 2012.

If I'm not mistaken, 2008 was the last year we've had experience in our running game.. and have been starting freshmen or sophs at that position ever since. The turnover at that position is starting to become troubling.
Click to expand...

Even in '08 we didn't have real experience. Going into that season, Greene hadn't carried the ball in over a year and 69 career rushing attempts.
 
SamBrownlee48 said:
Mostly a lurker on here, but I do want to say that you guys have a faulty understanding of what libel is. The crux of the majority of libel suits come down to whether the writer/publisher knew or should have known that what was said about the injured was false. Restating a rumor that you have heard, unless you have good reason to believe that it is not true, is not libel. The other part of a libel suit is proving damages. Even if you are intentionally spreading false rumors, nothing will come from it unless the victim can show injury that will sustain a verdict of more than nominal damages.

Also, a D1 collegiate football player's expectation of privacy, and thus his ability to sue for libel, even against knowingly false statements, is severely limited by the 1st amendment.

I am not saying that the forum rules against unsubstantiated rumors is a bad thing. But if the reason for it is because you want to limit your liability, you have no need to worry. Spreading rumors is not libelous unless you intentionally spread something you know or should know to be false.
Click to expand...


Thank you, sir.
 
@SamBrownlee48 & @ICBorn:

How do you prove that anybody knew a rumor was false? How do you prove that? If you think thats what would save you, you're terribly wrong. All you "wannabe" lawyers out there who watch "a few good men" and feel good about themselves have to remember that in a civil suit it does not have to be proven "beyond a shadow of a doubt" or 100% -- to win a civil suit, it's just 51%.

If I was Jon, I would be treading softly too with those numbers!
 
JonDMiller said:
My attorney may be able to successfully make the claim that a message board post isn't libelous. However, I still have to pay him to make that claim for me, and it isn't free. What is law and what is perceived law is immaterial; if someone sues you, you are going to lose money at a minimum.
Click to expand...


You cannot be held accountable for the content on your board. That would never hold in any court. It is unreasonable to think that a moderator has 24/7 control over the content placed by posters. This would be like holding someone accountable if another individual posted material on their facebook wall that was considered libelous.
 
ICbornNraised said:
Please PM me also.
I get that Jon doesn’t want things getting out of control, but the fact is Coker was suspended. Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t someone post early yesterday that something was coming down soon. The thread was then deleted by Jon, and it turned out to be true. What’s the harm in telling the rumor you heard. Put a disclaimer. THIS IS ONLY A RUMOR. I think most of us are reasonable enough to know that it is indeed a rumor, until we have facts. I just don’t see the harm. We aren’t writing articles for the Press-Citizen. We are posting on a message board. So between us HawkeyeNation friends, what have you heard. Or PM me, so the Peoples Republic of HawkeyeNation can’t censor.
Thanks
Click to expand...

Well for what its worth I have zero information nor do I need anyone to PM I’ll know sooner than I want to undoubtedly. With that said I would disagree fully with the “most of us are reasonable adults†thought and in fact…..if you asked me if I thought it was a good idea or “ok†to tell anyone something sensitive without validity on a message board I’d say THAT person is the very definition of unreasonable for even considering it.

Just my thoughts, maybe I'm old fashioned.

Chad
 
My guess is SamBrownlee48 has a legal background, so don't call him a wantabe.

2nd Sam did say he disagreed with Jon's policy, so back off.
 
JonDMiller said:
How about this..you create an account with your real name. Someone will send you the rumor, and you post it, with your name and where you work. In the event that what you heard doesn't turn out to be 100% factual, and someone comes to sue you for libel, I will have that information handy so that I can be sure to give you full credit, and liability.

Deal?
Click to expand...


I am so glad to see you lay this out here like that. I’ve said it for years and is one of the reasons I always sign my posts. People make fun of me, but quite frankly if everyone HAD to sign their post after they penned it, they’d be less caustic and more accountable for everything they said.

I n fact if I had my way, they’d have to leave their names (1st & last) town of residence, cell phone number and place of employment. We’d have way less critics that’s for darn sure.

Chad
 
DuffMan said:
I had a cousin who had a nasty habit of dating married women. He did this for 11 years without ever being contacted by one of his "girlfriends" husbands. Then one day one was waiting for him by his car with a 2x4 in hand after he got off work.

It turns out acting recklessly until someone or something gives you a reason to change isn't always the smartest way to go through life.
Click to expand...


Stunningly simple but very poignant, all the same.

Chad
 
smoot27 said:
You cannot be held accountable for the content on your board. That would never hold in any court. It is unreasonable to think that a moderator has 24/7 control over the content placed by posters. This would be like holding someone accountable if another individual posted material on their facebook wall that was considered libelous.
Click to expand...

This is the predominant issue here.

This is why Jon would have been better off from the start just saying he was doing so out of a matter of principle and integrity rather than some perceived fear of legal repercussion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top