860 Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle6801213.ece A Vogue cover girl has won a precedent-setting court battle to unmask an anonymous blogger who called her a “skank” on the internet. what the f*ck!? freedom of speach? there was a similar case here in Finland where a guy got 2 years in prison for calling some famous people with names. i mean seriously come on.. why is defamation (not sure if it´s the right word) illegal? if someone has an opinnion about you i think they have the right to say it. if you dont like it the too f*cking bad. EDIT: found this http://epicmodelfail.blogspot.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1066ant Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 (edited) Damn she's a skan... errr, perfectly respectable person... This amuses me, yet I feel sorry the guy whos in so much sh*t, and the guy who got sent to jail. The question is, why is she so interested in what some blogger has to say about her... Shouldn't she be doing something more to her taste like pole dancing or something... freedom of speach? Freedom of speech is myth now-a-days. Edited August 21, 2009 by 1066ant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pico Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Well the "freedom of speech" here in the US means you can say/do anything as long as it doesn't incite violence, riots, etc or break any other rights of people. I feel that calling some one a skank, idiot, asshole, etc does not fall under that. And people getting in trouble for that is bull sh*t. Like you said, if you don't like it, too f*cking bad. It's not like the blogger told everyone to kick her ass or rape her or something. He called her a skank. And guess what, she must be pretty insecure about her self to let a blogger get to her. Hey Liskula Cohen, I think you're a skank, too. And guess what? I'm in America and I'm allowed to say that, I know my rights, so tough sh*t. Oh, and you have a goofy ostrich looking face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killer783 Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Don't people need the Freedom of Speech? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
860 Posted August 21, 2009 Author Share Posted August 21, 2009 (edited) well the lawsuit definetly stopped people calling her a skank. OWAIT EDIT: for some reason i cant get the thing working. so click here Edited August 21, 2009 by 860 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exkabewbikadid Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 What this skanky, whoring piece of sh*t celebrity seems to have forgotten is that bad publicity is still publicity. The dumb bitch can't even make up her mind how she feels about what to do. And the court that sided with her in such an unprecedented manner ought to be hanged by a higher court. Really though, I'll never understand people's fascination with celebrities. No one is deserving of such obsessive levels of attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrownBear Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 well that sucks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machida Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Dear Liskula Cohen, Your menopause is showing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chunk Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 She must be a bit of a big-head. I mean, she must be have Googled herself, linking her to this blog, which has nothing wrong with it at all. I would call her something offensive, but it looks like free speech is out the window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrownBear Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 she a b*tch arrest me now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOGA62 Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 it's called defamation of Character. If there is no truth to the matter and she can prove the defamation is publicly damaging to things such as potential income from her line of work, or is costing her financial or emotional distress than she has every right to sue. Freedom of speech only goes so far. I don't see how having the right to call someone you don't even know a skank should be a huge "must have" right. Doing so in private or a small group, yeah you're totally within your legal standards because it is an opinion not being wide spread with malicious intend. But as soon as you start blasting such stuff online or around public in the hopes of getting the word spread as to what you thin, then you're starting to cross the line. The law protects people though to a certain extend, saying public figures (celebrities and politician alike) should expect and be able to put up with public opinions on their actions or beliefs (both negative and positive), but there are still boundaries. Obviously she was able to prove that these two guys took it beyond the normal scope of opinion. Social: TOGA62 PS3: balltowellamp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
860 Posted August 21, 2009 Author Share Posted August 21, 2009 ^^ the point here is that it should not be illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOGA62 Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 ^^ the point here is that it should not be illegal. no, my point was it should be legal, but only to a certain extent. There was a ruling made in this case, and although some might find it wrong, obviously a court judge or jury didn't. I don't feel I have a place in deciding if the ruling was correct or not unless I can review the court procedures and case files. So for now, I'm just stating the facts in regards to the law (US law anyways). Social: TOGA62 PS3: balltowellamp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m1armor Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 wow it shouldn't be illegal but its so funny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seachmall Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 (edited) There's a difference between defamation of character and giving an opinion. When somebody says "You're a skank" it's implied that that is their opinion. Plus 'skank' isn't a legally defined term, how exactly could they prove the poster's intention? Penn and Teller had/have a show called 'Bullsh*t!' where they called various industries, and various people, bullsh*t. Why "Bullsh*t!"? "If one calls people 'liars' and 'quacks' one can be sued and lose a lot of one's money...If we said it was all scams, we could also lose a lot of money. Bullsh*t's pretty safe." (Season 1,Episode 1). For all we know 'Skank' means 'Pretty classy lady' in some arse-of-nowhere town. If it's not a direct accusation which consists of legally defined terms it's not defamation. Edited August 21, 2009 by Seachmall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creed Bratton Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 What a skank! Internet is all about anonymity. You take that away you might as well go outside and tell her in the face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seachmall Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Oprah and Dr. Oz are suing companies using their likeness to sell diet supplement, clearly without permission. There is merit to the law when not abused, I think she has right to TRY and sue, I guess, but perhaps on TV court shows would be better entertainment!! Slamman wants to comment but he's temped Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
860 Posted August 21, 2009 Author Share Posted August 21, 2009 Oprah and Dr. Oz are suing companies using their likeness to sell diet supplement, clearly without permission. There is merit to the law when not abused, I think she has right to TRY and sue, I guess, but perhaps on TV court shows would be better entertainment!! Slamman wants to comment but he's temped he PM´d me too Even Rockstar has a game about Bullies, I can't comment in your thread, but I was the victim of bullys in school and suing is long joked about in America as a way of getting some justice or revenge "I'll sue your ass", a ped claims in GTA, and you can actually sue over deformation of character, so I see it as legal basically Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jelly Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Hey, guys, when someone is temporarily banned it's not the intention that others post their posts for them. FYI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seachmall Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 It's nice to be nice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livejoker Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Hey, guys, when someone is temporarily banned it's not the intention that others post their posts for them. FYI. FYI, banning sucks. It should be illigal, becausel like this topic, it prevents us from giving our opinion to a certain topic. As for the topic, I don't think he had the right. That's just insulting. Freedom of speech is a right, to an extent. I do think...whoever is sueing the guy, did go overboard, but when he made a blog entry about her, that's just pathetic. I don't get why people put blogs up. You must be really lonely (no offence to any bloggers, I love reading your stuff ). So, whatever i'm saying, in conclusion, i'm somewhat happy she sued him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exkabewbikadid Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Hey, guys, when someone is temporarily banned it's not the intention that others post their posts for them. FYI. FYI, banning sucks. FYI, the next person to post for Slamman will be temp banned along with him. Sucks? Well no one is asking you to like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livejoker Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Hey, guys, when someone is temporarily banned it's not the intention that others post their posts for them. FYI. FYI, banning sucks. FYI, the next person to post for Slamman will be temp banned along with him. Sucks? Well no one is asking you to like it. FYI, I never PM'd or got PM'd by Slamman. Can't you mods view this? You only concluded this from what I said and made it pass it out as if I was on Slamman's side by cutting all my paragraph and posting my 3 first words. Bann me. I've just been out of a 2-day bann. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D- Ice Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Is this a f*cking joke?! Models like that make a living by showing of their bodies - that is the product/service they are providing. And as much right as people have to scrutinise the products or services they recieve from anywhere else - like food at a restaurant - they have to scrutinise the service these models provide - their apparantly attractive bodies. He never made a personal insult against her, but rather was expressing his disatisfaction at how he was expecting an attractive woman to fap over - what he recieved instead was a skank. If anything, it should be the cheap, bad-quality skank who should be sued to compensate the man for the massive turn-off that happens to be her ugly mug. Oh, and have they not forgot that this is the internet? This is the last bastion of completely uncensored media and expression, people here say all sorts of crap - even criminals, murderers, terrorists, Jap freaky fetishists, extremists groups like the KKK and even goddamn cannibals have their own websites where the express their views. They aren't seriously gonna hunt someone down and demilish his privacy over a silly thing like that? What right do they have - it is his blog, and the publication of his most intimate thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sauron Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Hey, guys, when someone is temporarily banned it's not the intention that others post their posts for them. FYI. FYI, banning sucks. FYI, the next person to post for Slamman will be temp banned along with him. Sucks? Well no one is asking you to like it. FYI, I never PM'd or got PM'd by Slamman. Can't you mods view this? You only concluded this from what I said and made it pass it out as if I was on Slamman's side by cutting all my paragraph and posting my 3 first words. Bann me. I've just been out of a 2-day bann. I believe he was speaking in general terms and he never said that you were PM'd by Slamman or posted for him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livejoker Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Hey, guys, when someone is temporarily banned it's not the intention that others post their posts for them. FYI. FYI, banning sucks. FYI, the next person to post for Slamman will be temp banned along with him. Sucks? Well no one is asking you to like it. FYI, I never PM'd or got PM'd by Slamman. Can't you mods view this? You only concluded this from what I said and made it pass it out as if I was on Slamman's side by cutting all my paragraph and posting my 3 first words. Bann me. I've just been out of a 2-day bann. I believe he was speaking in general terms and he never said that you were PM'd by Slamman or posted for him My point still stands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Tequeli Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Stupid c*nt. Of course I'm in Canada where freedom of expression is a play thing, so I don't feel particularly safe saying that. Defamation is (or should be) if I were to publish an article saying she was a convicted child molester, that is about as far as it should go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1066ant Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Wait somebody called me dick on the internet once, does this mean I could sue because I am not a dick? I have one but I'm not a giant walking penis... If a potential employer read that I was a dick they may not hire me because of my apparent giant penisness. That is Defamation, so I can sue her for many, many piles of cash and get her locked up? Please say I can... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Zone Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 The judicial system is ran by people. And people can, and will, be wrong. Just learn to expect the people who run it to be bought off by cheap sluts who don't want someone to think she is a slut, even though she's a slut. Slut. I hope she sues me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScratchCard Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Hmm... here in Holland the prison time for rape is about 6 years, 2 years for calling someone a skunk seams perfectly reasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now