rcj@burl.UUCP (08/07/83)
A few points regarding electronic slander &/or libel: a) I am not aware of *ANY* cases that have been successfully prosecuted; is anyone else? If so, please drop me a line via elec. mail at the address below -- Thanks. b) You cannot be prosecuted for tearing a company to ribbons if you follow a few simple guidelines: 1) Always leave the slightest bit of doubt somewhere that it might have been your fault after all -- don't say "The WORMCO Frammin would not address memory properly"; say rather that "I was unable to make the the WORMCO Frammin address memory properly". 2) It is INsufficient to state damning facts -- when you are hauled into court you had better have some sort of documentation (the solid kind) to back up your claims. 3) ALWAYS contact the company in question with your problem and keep records of such contacts BEFORE you electronically fry them -- courts tend to frown severely when the company whines that they were not informed of the problem before they were libeled and you hem and haw... 4) It is usually much safer if you bypass intermediate bureaucrats in the offending company and talk to someone at the top; informing that person that you are dissatisfied with both the product/service and with how his company is handling the matter. Then, if you get no satisfaction; use your local newspaper's ACTION* column or even the courts to get justice -- sue them for "business malpractice" before they can sue you for libel. *ACTION: Many decent-sized newspapers have columns that you can call or write to with the "I sent them the money 3 months ago and they won't even answer my letters" type of complaints -- these columns will call the company in question and usually get very good and very fast results. c) Electronic mail can be forged, as I am sure everyone reading knows. Even so, this is not a sure out if you have bitched to 15 people over lunch about the rotten Frammin you are stuck with -- be careful. d) Lastly, it is great to be self-righteous; but why put yourself in any danger at all when it is unnecessary. If you want to warn others, that is good -- but with the USENET set up the way it is, it is usually sufficient to post an article saying: My Frammin will not address memory properly; what am I doing wrong? Please reply via the net. and you will be amazed at the number of people who will reply (if the product is genuinely rotten) with things like: You aren't doing anything wrong; my Frammin don't work either!! Now, you have stirred up the anthill under the company's offices without leaving your footprints along the walkway. And hopefully had fun doing it!! Comments, criticisms, and phone-numbers/addresses of intelligent, charming women are welcomed, :-) -- The MAD Programmer -- 919-228-3814 (Cornet 291) alias: Curtis Jackson ...![ floyd sb1 mhuxv ]!burl!rcj
sts@ssc-vax.UUCP (Stanley T Shebs) (08/08/83)
The issue can't be that simple (getting sued over a Usenet contribution and/or flame about a product). After all, one can find many letters in Byte and elsewhere that are much in the same vein, not to mention the "troubleshooter" columns in the papers. Just the other day, I read a (in the Seattle Times) review of the new Osborne computer which was very unfavorable, and will almost certainly hurt sales. I doubt that the paper would have risked a suit over a single review. In fact, movie and concert reviews are also in the same bag, so this is not a new or unique problem. Gordon is certainly right in asserting that when the inevitable industry shakedown occurs, there will be a lot of fingerpointing, and Usenet will quite likely be blamed (unjustly) for some company failures. Personally, I think that is one of the best justifications for Usenet. In these days of super-hype advertising, it's an effective counterbalance for the outrageous lies that we are continually bombarded with. Don't you find the unvarnished facts (even if edged with a bit of fire) rather refreshing? stan the leprechaun hacker ssc-vax!sts (soon utah-cs) ps sorry, but don't y'all mean "libel"? Or am I missing something?
bstempleton@watmath.UUCP (Brad Templeton) (08/09/83)
Usenet blamed for a company failure? I doubt it. At the current size
the net has no more than 10,000 readers, and a particular group has
far fewer than this. Of those readers, only a small percentage would
be potential customers for a certain product, and only a percentage
of those would not buy the product due to the review. We are talking
about a few hundred customers, and no company should fail from that loss.
If the net grows, it must grow in a different direction. It must.
Some of you may not know it, but this is vacation time on the net, and
net usage is down quite a bit because.
1) A certain %age of all posters are out on vacation
2) Schools are mostly out.
3) Many posters from schools have now left their school and the net
unless they find work.
I suspect we'll see it really hit the fan in the fall. Especially
now that how to join usenet has been printed in the August BYTE.
--
Brad Templeton - Waterloo, Ont. (519) 886-7304