Sunshine Posts

[Danno]

Danno quoted US law and said


Which ignores that this is an international forum and Sunshine could sue under Canadian law, or another jurisdiction that is even more favourable to them (e.g. under UK libel law).

I did mention the international issue, and I admittedly know very little. Can you cite something to show me how a foreign court could have jurisdiction over a US company with servers in the US based upon posts by who knows, made from who knows where, that was then enforceable in the US? Just curious, because it sounds pretty outrageous to me that TGR could be successfully sued in England, and have that judgment enforced in US courts, just because I say "I saw Prince Charles have sex with a call girl."

[powder11]

I don't know of any law that says you can't post a bunch of random words.

Scurfield asshole spoiled Taylor bitch scumbag sunshine ski fired village lawsuit patrol

[f2f]

Can you cite something to show me how a foreign court could have jurisdiction over a US company with servers in the US based upon posts by who knows, made from who knows where, that was then enforceable in the US?

here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/07...s_libel_claim/ this one was against google, of all things.

that said, you're bikeshedding and detracting from the real topic here. it doesn't matter what the UK libel laws are as they're only hypothetically relevant to the issue. let it go and let's continue on our merry way of saying that (in our opinions) SSV sucks donkey kong's balls through pipettes.

[Joe Strummer]

This family must have been born with a silver spoon in their brain.

Actually I think it was a peanut

[Danno]

here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/07...s_libel_claim/ this one was against google, of all things.

that said, you're bikeshedding and detracting from the real topic here. it doesn't matter what the UK libel laws are as they're only hypothetically relevant to the issue. let it go and let's continue on our merry way of saying that (in our opinions) SSV sucks donkey kong's balls through pipettes.

It's not bikeshedding, we're discussing the very point of this thread. And your link re Google isn't on point, because Google almost certainly has a presence in Europe and probably the UK specifically. Google and TGR are not comparable.

[SterlingSpikeDancer]

Didn't the U.S. solve the whole ability of other countries' companies being able to sue us based on their laws for things that happen on our soil during the American Revolution?

So, if I say something I presume to be true, as a representative of a company (TGR for example, with which I have NO paid affiliation) and it is knowingly false/slanderous, WTF are they gonna do, deport me to Canadian prison?

Whole situation is dodgy at best and sounds like the idiots at SSV continue to drive business away. You can definitely count this Yank as one who will never spend a dime there. Ever. What a bunch of unsafe douchebags. That last statement is fact.

[powdork]

ASSCUNTS. that's what they are.


otoh, you can ski for free at lake louise from may 2-may 9. now lake louise and the other banff resorts need to come up with a support ski patrol pass for next year that they can sell during that week.

[coldfeet]

Danno quoted US law and said


Which ignores that this is an international forum and Sunshine could sue under Canadian law, or another jurisdiction that is even more favourable to them (e.g. under UK libel law).

But in order to enforce a judgment, they would have to enforce it against TGR assets that are in the jurisdiction of choice, such as Canada or the UK. For example, in recent libel (or libel-tourism) cases against books that were published in the UK (for example Irving vs. Lipstadt, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_...s_and_Lipstadt) the case is brought against a UK edition of the book and UK assets of the publisher. If Irving had won that case, he could have suppressed the UK edition of the book, but the judgment would not be enforceable in a US court and you could still buy the book in the US.

If the NY Times writes that the ruler of Turkblogistan is a maniacal tyrant, he could sue in a Turkblog court, but he couldn't stop the Times from publishing unflattering things about him on the interwebs.

I am not a lawyer, but I think this is a weak case for a couple of reasons, and a C+D letter is essentially bluff. It's also an insanely bad PR strategy.

[G]

This looks ugly. It's been over a year and the case has not yet been resolved.

Gundi Holm, the owner of Maldives Scuba Diving LTD, has initiated a ten million dollar lawsuit against scubaboard.com and 100 unnamed individuals who post on its forum. Holm claims that the negative postings on the board caused monetary damages.


http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/scu...1-members.html

Maldives Scuba Diving, a Maldives-based company that organises dive trips to the Maldives sues Scubaboard over ‘torts, injury — Assault, Libel, and Slander’

This tall tale has its beginnings in the tragic events that happened during a SCUBA trip in the Maldive islands on 28 May 2008 when 11 divers suddenly fell ill and one diver—the 36-year old Russian national, Roman Rudakov—died due to contaminated air in the scuba tanks. According to one first hand witness, the levels of carbon monoxide were measured to be ten times that of acceptable levels.

The incident was reported by much of the global dive media and widely discussed on many scuba diving forums and discussion boards, including ScubaBoard.com forums, which resulted in a great deal of negative publicity for the organiser of the trip, a company, which at that time traded under the name, Strictly Maldives.
  Sometime after the incident, the company either changed their name or the company’s owner, Gundi Holm, who is an Austrian national, started up a new company named, Maldives Scuba Diving (MSD). When members of ScubaBoard caught wind of this, they began to spread the word on the forum, warning others about the owner’s history.
  According to MSD—who claims they were nothing more than the travel agent for the diving trip and the local crew was the one responsible for the safety of their guests—the tone on the forum crossed into libel and slander.

Ten million dollars

On 29 January 2010, MSD filed a libel suit against InterMedia Publications, one of the forum’s members—a Canadian they identified as Brian Verbonac—as well as one hundred “John Does” they do not know the identity of. MSD is seeking an excess of ten million dollars for “damages“. Their lawsuit can be downloaded here.
  In response, members of Scuba-Board have rallied around their administrators, raising money to help defend the case, which they anticipate may cost them up to US$100,000. The administrators at ScubaBoard have not (as of the date of publication of this issue) removed any of the allegedly libellous posts.

[AKPogue]

^^^^ How do you collect from a hundred "John Does"?

[Jizzles]

Ummm..... One of the threads was mine.... My Bad. I just got a e mail from facebook. this is what it said.
Hello,

We have removed or disabled access to the following content that you have posted on Facebook because we received a notice from a third party that the content infringes or otherwise violates their rights:
Not sure if i should repeat my comment... then they went on to say...
We strongly encourage you to review the content you have posted to Facebook to make sure that you have not posted any other infringing content, as it is our policy to terminate the accounts of repeat infringers when appropriate.

The Facebook Team
Meh.

[goldenshowers]

Yeah Louise for offering us free skiing! It has come to my attention and perhaps it can be confirmed but isn't the public opinion that the family that owns SSV is a bunch of losers and the resort should not be visited at all costs? Something about a cease and desist giving SSV your business? Furthermore was it said that the owners son is a prissy little bitch who hangs out with the WestJet owners son and perhaps more rich snobs? Is it true that Ralph Scurfield is king Phallus in the land of the dickheads?

Somebody please help answer these questions for me!

[bertrenolds]

A public figure must show "actual malice"—that you published with either knowledge of falsity or in reckless disregard for the truth. This is a difficult standard for a plaintiff to meet.

Good luck proving this, I am guessing the threads will be put back up after a while.

And rember to say, " it is my opinion that the scurfields are a bunch of asshats"!

I also wanted to say someone should send SSV a S&D for calling the ski patrollers a bunch of drunks that drink on the job, now that sounds like slander to me.

[Danno]

I doubt anyone in this case would qualify as a "public figure."

[The Duke of Hurl]

Anybody ski this week?

[summit]

Seriously, I'd been ignoring that whole SSV thread until they pulled this shit. I will make it my mission to inform all skiers about the Scurfields and their douchetastic ways. Fuck them and the mule they rode in on.

[khyber.pass]

I find it hard to believe that Sunshine has the cashola to bring this to court. Given the economic woes of the ski industry I highly doubt they have the resources to fight what would be an incredibly difficult to prove case of libel/slander. These are simple scare tactics. If your lawyers know the game, they will tear up the C&D and go tell Sunshine (in lawyer-speak) to go fuck themselves.

[powder11]

It's gotta suck for Taylor Scurfeild to have his name so cunted up on the interwebz.

[My Pet Powder Goat]

It's gotta suck for Taylor Scurfeild to have his name so cunted up on the interwebz.

exactly, it's gotta suck that even people who haven't even met him yet already know he's (allegedly) a whiney tool

[Cono Este]

These people have a gift. Turn a mediocre situation of getitng caught out of bounds into all this???

Man, lately I thought I had some skills at turning gold bars into turds.

I am still an amateur. Respect.

[skatha]

It's gotta suck for Taylor Scurfeild to have his name so cunted up on the interwebz.

There's a difference between someone who makes minimum wage and someone who inherited millions. The person who inherited millions always has friends, no matter what the internets say

[doughboyshredder]

"friends" does not equal friends.

[bushman]

I've got lots of rich friends and no rich douchebag friends. A douchebag is a douchebag, money not withstanding.

[Jizzles]

When you have a lot of money, you accumulate a lot of "freinds". Id say even Taylors Mates think he's a bit of a Pole smoker.

[JD May]

The armchair lawyering in this thread is painfully funny. Basically no one has posted anything with respect to the law without saying something really embarassingly wrong. Makes me wonder just how facepalm-worthy internet medical advice is. Probably even worse.