|
|
Post by jackpease on Jun 29, 2014 6:20:07 GMT
>>>public information / links to public information etc
With my journo hat on again, there is a huge misunderstanding that once something is public information then it is legally safe. Something that is said publicly, or is reported or posted or printed somewhere, is of course 'public information' but that doesn't make it correct or safe - so repeating is not safe. I worked for a tiny technical mag once and the publisher was done for £100k for lifting a story out of the Manchester Evening News which turned out to be incorrect.
Court transcripts, Hansard, council minutes are truly 'public information' and legally safe to report contemparaneously under privilege.
I started off this thread trying to see a way through for discussing FF but I can see its pretty hopeless - mods are not libel specialists, they are volunteers, they can't be expected to take risks when there is no libel insurance nor pot of money to deal with problems, James suggested how moneysavingexpert forums can get away with it - that is a great idea - presumably when things get sticky on this board we can start a thread on that board and mods would let us link to it?
Jack P
|
|
pikestaff
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,189 
Likes: 1,546
|
Post by pikestaff on Jun 29, 2014 7:12:37 GMT
jackpease I take your point about the mods not being libel specialists. I think the current line of "stick to hard facts" is mistaken, but it is safe. Unfortunately this means we will never be able to have a sensible discussion on this forum about difficult cases where lenders are asked to vote on a proposal. In any such case there is likely to be uncertainty about at least some of the facts, and/or questions around motive and trust that cannot be reduced to hard facts. It should be possible to discuss these things without being libellous but I agree that it's a fine line to tread. Using the moneysavingexpert forum is a good idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jun 29, 2014 7:40:28 GMT
But that should not be an issue if the fact that the company has a loan with a particular p2x company is in the public domain (so much so as to be visible from the p2x company's website without logging in). Assetz Capital: borrower and often guarantor real names available to all including search engines. It appears that all wth an account can get details of status updates of past loans, not just those who lent, though I don't have an account there so someone may want to confirm or contradict this belief. Not always true: there have been anonymous borrowers on AC not even known to logged in lenders. Anyway, part of the reasons for the problems here is not identification, its that fact that ease of identification has been coupled with a number of comments which have not just speculated that xxx may have done yyyy, but very strong implication from the post that xxxx has committed yyyy where this is not a known public fact.
|
|
james
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 955
|
Post by james on Jun 29, 2014 23:20:33 GMT
The technical mag case is somewhat misleading since a technical mag is not a message board and they were unambiguously the publisher at all times. Not so for posts from non-moderators here, though moderators may be presumed to be "here" and must take more care than the rest of us. While neither Zeran v. America Online, Inc. nor Cubby, Inc. v. CompuServe Inc. is technically binding on UK courts, there has been a substantial agreement that owners of a board are at a minimum not liable for things they don't know about. Not necessarily as far as the Communications Decency Act section 230 immunity but still of significant value and a world of difference from the Stratton Oakmont, Inc. v. Prodigy Services Co. position that the moderators here appear to effectively be presuming applies. I don't agree with starting a discussion at MSE if things get sticky here. Better to start one well before, perhaps a base topic for discussion of each vendor. Bracknellboy, there's a big difference between a flat assertion that x has done y and discussion of what might happen or be the best response for a lender if x has done y. |
|
|
|
Post by elljay on Jun 30, 2014 11:33:39 GMT
We're finalising the mechanics of how it will work, but the plan is to have a board that is accessible to confirmed Assetz Capital members only. Google won't have access so there will be the ability to name AC borrowers and discuss loans more freely. Rules around sticking to facts and not posting anything libellous will still be in place.
|
|
|
|
Post by elljay on Jun 30, 2014 14:38:33 GMT
The private board is now available. Anyone logged in can see it exists, but not access the content. Please follow the instructions in the group description to request access. (At the top of the Assetz Capital forum page here.) |
|
