|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
![]() |
tblue37
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 10:40 AM Original message |
Right-Winger Sues Blogger And Wins |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tblue37
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 10:46 AM Response to Original message |
1. Can we keep this kicked so others can see what's going on? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
The Doctor.
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 09:45 PM Response to Reply #1 |
26. "Turnabout is Fair Play" - I think this is worth butting. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
liberaldemocrat7
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 09:49 PM Response to Reply #1 |
27. and what Republican hypocrites don't like frivolous lawsuits? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BrklynLiberal
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 10:47 AM Response to Original message |
2. K & R...and horrified!!!! Is there any appeal possible? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tblue37
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 10:49 AM Response to Reply #2 |
3. Actually, I imagine he could appeal-- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Divine Discontent
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 09:28 PM Response to Reply #3 |
22. I agree WRITE KEITH OLBERMANN! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
drm604
![]() |
Mon Jun-18-07 09:25 AM Response to Reply #3 |
44. Isn't this something the ACLU would support? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TeamJordan23
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 10:52 AM Response to Original message |
4. Wow. This is really disturbing. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tblue37
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 10:52 AM Response to Original message |
5. Oh, hey--4 votes! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
William769
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 10:56 AM Response to Original message |
6. Want to take a guess as to how to keep judges like this in power? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tblue37
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 11:03 AM Response to Reply #6 |
7. That's one of those "secret programs" BushCo has in place. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gman
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 11:24 AM Response to Original message |
8. This may have opened the flood gates for liberals to sue RW'ers |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lonestarnot
![]() |
Mon Jun-18-07 08:12 AM Response to Reply #8 |
40. And then the blogger being sued should have the case removed to Superior Court. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cascadiance
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 11:36 AM Response to Original message |
9. Maybe Dems can get *practice* impeaching judges like this too! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
yurbud
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 11:40 AM Response to Original message |
10. Does this kid have a tip jar or pay pal account to defray his costs? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tblue37
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 11:45 PM Response to Reply #10 |
33. Yes. He is taking donations at his site-- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
yurbud
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 11:42 AM Response to Original message |
11. as if it wasn't already clear, the academic watch types just proved they don't want academic freedom |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Honeycombe8
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 11:46 AM Response to Original message |
12. Not enough info to support the blogger. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Solo_in_MD
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 11:54 AM Response to Original message |
13. The defendant has posted some responses on Slashdot |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Danascot
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 06:18 PM Response to Reply #13 |
19. I thought small claims |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Solo_in_MD
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 09:43 PM Response to Reply #19 |
24. Apparently he got no legal advice whatsoever and got trounced |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sakabatou
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 12:03 PM Response to Original message |
14. K&R |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RadiDem
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 12:16 PM Response to Original message |
15. I predict this Bozo's Judge's Bogus Decision will be overturned |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Seabiscuit
![]() |
Mon Jun-18-07 01:50 AM Response to Reply #15 |
37. The blogger apparently failed to appeal it to the Superior Court for a trial de novo. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tblue37
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 01:19 PM Response to Original message |
16. He is raising money to pay his legal expenses--and also as a |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Faygo Kid
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 04:11 PM Response to Original message |
17. Lee Kaplan's latest column: "A Victory for Freedom of Speech." Bizarre. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TeamJordan23
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 04:13 PM Response to Reply #17 |
18. haha. Oh the irony. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Old and In the Way
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 07:29 PM Response to Original message |
20. Terrible precedent. Does nothing but chill our 1st Amendment rights. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Solo_in_MD
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 09:44 PM Response to Reply #20 |
25. Not a precedent...it was small claims court |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Old and In the Way
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 11:37 PM Response to Reply #25 |
31. OK...but, not the practical effect of such a ruling will only start the |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bentcorner
![]() |
Mon Jun-18-07 08:56 AM Response to Reply #20 |
42. The only precedent is that you don't email a blogger's employer |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bjobotts
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 07:55 PM Response to Original message |
21. Appeal the decision first |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tblue37
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 11:36 PM Response to Reply #21 |
30. I believe the blogger this happened to is going to appeal. He |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Divine Discontent
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 09:30 PM Response to Original message |
23. happily recommend number fifty.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MaraJade
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 10:53 PM Response to Original message |
28. I'll keep it kicked. . . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Spiffarino
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 11:18 PM Response to Original message |
29. Whether or not this case sets a "precedent" (it doesn't)... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Iris
![]() |
Mon Jun-18-07 10:35 AM Response to Reply #29 |
50. keep us posted. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ooglymoogly
![]() |
Sun Jun-17-07 11:41 PM Response to Original message |
32. Well I sent keith a missle and hope it is one of many |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Miss Chybil
![]() |
Mon Jun-18-07 12:21 AM Response to Original message |
34. What the hell is "business interference?" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Seabiscuit
![]() |
Mon Jun-18-07 01:48 AM Response to Reply #34 |
36. "Business interference" is a real civil claim. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Seabiscuit
![]() |
Mon Jun-18-07 01:47 AM Response to Original message |
35. We don't need to "reverse this". Small claims cases do *not* set legal precedent for future cases. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jobycom
![]() |
Mon Jun-18-07 10:15 AM Response to Reply #35 |
47. Thanks for the much-needed legal details. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Major Hogwash
![]() |
Mon Jun-18-07 02:25 AM Response to Original message |
38. The irony is that Horowitz is a grenade-lobbing anti-intellectual. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
nedbal
![]() |
Mon Jun-18-07 03:45 AM Response to Original message |
39. Free speech and the Internet: A fish story |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bentcorner
![]() |
Mon Jun-18-07 08:26 AM Response to Original message |
41. He sent emails to Kaplan's employer. That's what he was sued for. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jobycom
![]() |
Mon Jun-18-07 10:19 AM Response to Reply #41 |
48. Links? (not challenging you, just trying to understand the case better). |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bentcorner
![]() |
Mon Jun-18-07 11:06 AM Response to Reply #48 |
52. It's found on the Kaplan Watch website. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wndycty
![]() |
Mon Jun-18-07 08:57 AM Response to Original message |
43. Kick |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Take_The_Red_Pill
![]() |
Mon Jun-18-07 09:37 AM Response to Original message |
45. At least it wasn't George Allen |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cyberpj
![]() |
Mon Jun-18-07 10:03 AM Response to Original message |
46. The blogger should contact the ACLU. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Iris
![]() |
Mon Jun-18-07 10:34 AM Response to Original message |
49. So women bloggers can be harrassed, have their personal information exposed, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
aikoaiko
![]() |
Mon Jun-18-07 10:46 AM Response to Original message |
51. Details.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tblue37
![]() |
Mon Jun-18-07 02:52 PM Response to Reply #51 |
53. He explains it all on his blog, which I linked above. (eom) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Thu Jun 13th 2024, 01:37 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
![]() |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC