Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 03:24:36PM -0400, David Kramer wrote: > On Thu, 12 Aug 2004, Derek Martin wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 01:55:47PM -0400, Eric wrote: > > > Another thing, I have never said that I've used Linux since 1991. > > > > You most certainly did. > > > > http://www.blu.org/pipermail/discuss/2004-August/046440.html > > No, he's right. He said he used Linux IN 1991, not SINCE 1991. Reread > that email. Not that any of us believe that either, but we cannot > prove/disprove that. Perhaps, but it's a subtle semantic argument. In the e-mail I referenced, he claimed that he used Linux "in '90 or '91 until '95." He did not use the word "since" -- so technically what he said above is true. However, since he appears to be using Linux now, and claims to have used it from '90 or '91 until '95, the meaning of "since" applies to that (even if intermittently). Since he didn't put quotes around his statement above, I didn't interpret his statement to be suggesting that he didn't use those exact words, but that he never said anything with the same meaning. The former is true, the latter is not. This kind of confusion is why it really is important for people to pay attention to the proper use of spelling and grammar, and why I occasionally rant about that on mailing lists such as this one... > I am going to list some resources for finding out more information on > Jules Gilbert. I make no statements to my opinion of him by doing so; > merely listing some information for others to form their own opinion. My understanding of libel is that your opinion is safe; so long as you are clear to present your statements as being your opinion, you can not be sued for stating it. [Or rather, you can be sued for literally anything; but the plaintiff will be thrown out of court for having no case.] Libel is defined as presenting statements as facts when they are false, and when there is damage to a party as a result of those misrepresented statements. That is, in order to be libel, there must be two elements: 1. false statements misrepresented as facts 2. damages to some party as a result Your opinion is your opinion, and you have a constitutionally guaranteed right to express it. So long as you make it very clear that it is your opinion, and you don't misrepresent any facts, you should have no legal issues. That should be true EVEN IF someone experiences discernible damages from you stating your opinion. This is why you can not be sued for organizing a boycott. Of course, that is no guarantee that someone won't drag you into court anyway... Note that the preceding should not be construed as legal advice; I am not a lawyer and I don't give out legal advice. If you think you need legal advice, see a lawyer. -- Derek D. Martin http://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail. Sorry for the inconvenience. Thank the spammers.
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |