Interesting: Websites and Legal Responsibilities

[WilliamPowell]

This is a few weeks after the event but I thought I would post about it anyway.

This is a small piece from the Sunday Herald Sun of November 13th 2005. It was on page 56 and was part of Scot Palmers’ “Palmer’s Punchlines”

“Lawyers are examining an interstate-based website on which it is believed a former AFL champion and a leading media figure have possibly defamed. They also plan to alert an AFL Club over its logo being used on the site”

I don’t know which site it is or the persons involved and to be honest I don’t’ care.

It is possible that there were no further details in the article because of the legal side of things.

The reason I decided to post this is because it highlights the possible legal ramifications for a site like this if you allow unsubstantiated rumours to be posted, hence why we either edited them or ask you to edit them. Even things posted totally “tongue in cheek” can get a website into trouble.

Just something to keep mind 

[Razorblade]

So why is bigfooty still up and running?

[tiga]

Ox is forsaken up and running again in it's 75th incarnation??  

I know, the usual suspects are always under suspicion first. Just like that scene from "crash" where Sandra bullock is walking down the mall and clocks two gentleman of African American decent. I won't spoil it for anyone who hasn't seen the film. 

[tiga]

Ox is forsaken up and running again in it's 75th incarnation??  

I know, the usual suspects are always under suspicion first. Just like that scene from "crash" where Sandra bullock is walking down the mall and clocks two gentleman of African American decent. I won't spoil it for anyone who hasn't seen the film. 

Sorry, you posting 8 lines down has answered my question. Good to see you are as resilient as ever.  This world needs it rogues and grumpy old men!