The proposed new suppression laws have clarified the position of message boards as being no different than the print media. That solidifies the common law position that the liability of defamation (or broken court orders, as in the case of suppression) lies with the publisher as well as the speaker or writer - so underlying again that the current action in the Auckland High Court commenced by Joe Karam is against Parker&co as well as Trade Me for being the publishers. Trade Me won't like that (although they have already reserved their lawful position to enjoin posters,) Kent Parker will see the benefit to him not to have to carry the full liability of his publications because with his probable position of becoming 'a rat fleeing a sinking ship' this has had taken from him the 'moral' opportunity to exclude from liability the individuals whose comment he published.
It might be the only thing I could ever agree with Kent Parker on, although for obviously different reasons, but it would be an abhorrence if the nina_s, luckytraders, linz4mes, dcameron's of this world were not brought to task and could cowardly sit back while others took responsibility for their defamatory claims. I can't see the law allowing it for it would be a dangerous precedent. I imagine Joe Karam doesn't particularly care if the minnows are not enjoined because he clearly sees that without the hate-sites or Trade Me the pathetic, anonymous posters would not have had a venue for their defamatory filth. But on another level, beyond that of an individual plaintiff as Joe Karam is, it is important that the individual posters be brought to task, and Trade Me will certainly have an interest in that, as will Kent Parker who has already written about the subject. Those posters in particular, and the public in general, need to understand that they are responsible for what they say and write in public venue.
None of this is to say however, that Joe Karam might (and can) simply include (enjoin) all those whose posts he had determined to be defamatory of him. He may take the attitude in for a penny in for a pound. Well, as GNG use to say 'I'm glad it's not me getting sued.'
What I find extremely hilarious is the way Kent keeps talking about the defamtion case, making people look back to see what he and his band of supporters have said, thus increasing the amount of people who have been exposed to said defamation.
ReplyDeleteIf Kent wants to part with the money so much, why doesn't he just make a big donation to the fund? Oh, that's right, it's not Kent's money, he's only the mouth, it's everyone else that's going to be paying. No wonder he's doesn't care how much he stirs the situation, it's not going to cost him a cent.
Please pass my name on to little Joey.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to come to court and tell everyone how shocking it's been reading what our Kenty has said about parrot ladies, late night visits with jurors and money rip off schemes.
I can't seem to get away from it, they're everywhere, even when I read about politics on that tardme me webbythingy.
I used to think Joey was a lovely sweet thing, but I'm not sure now after what Kenty's said. It makes me cry just thinking about it. I hope they don't mind tears on the stand. It's all so upsetting.
If kent doesn't think it's going to cost him a cent he is more deluded than first feared. Activity on his sites has fallen as even the very thick realise it's time to do a runner. Any Court orders made will be made against Kent and Vic as well as those enjoined, they will have to pay or be bankrupted. I recall a time when ret1 was suggesting they all put in $20, even if there were five hundred of them (I think the figure is actually less than 20)they'll be unable to pay to have the case defended to the point of trial let alone the trial itself.
ReplyDeleteKent's 'friends' will abandon him in short order, claiming that they didn't know what they were getting into and other such things. It's the way of the world, fair weather friends or in this case persecutors. No, I think it will cost Kent all he has and probably a lot more. One of the many problems he has created for himself was placing in his followers minds that first of all Karam wouldn't sue, then secondly after he had, that Kent would wipe the case out before it got to Court. While that all sounded fine, it has also given the 'followers' an out, they can say 'we believed you Kent, it's not our fault.'
I know of one civil case that lasted many years. One of the defendant's moderately wealthy wife was never able to reach beyond the question 'how did it get this far?' The hangbainers (including kent and Vic in particular) will be asking that question right now, and if they can be truthful with themselves - won't like the answer.
Dear Aunt Agatha,
ReplyDeleteYou can't upset yourself with the things that Kenty has said. He's one of those naughty boys that tell lies and even big whoppers. He's a fibber Aunt Agatha, he can't help himself. He needs straightening out with a firm hand, he was indulged as a boy to the point that he became infatuated with himself and had a terrible case of acne at the age of 14, apparently even his mother called him crater head.
So don't cry Aunt Agatha, Joe will be just fine and if you feel a little upset because of Kent's wailing and sobbing in the background when they call you to give evidence just remember it's all for the best and that Kent is just getting straightened out - bless his little cotton socks.
Yours etc
nosty-boy.