Sax on the Web Forum banner

Fraudulent Forums

8K views 20 replies 12 participants last post by  MartinMods 
#1 ·
Just wondering what some other opinions might be should someone be proven to be running a fraudulent web forum, posing as multiple private individuals for the purpose of disparaging another individual, or group of individuals. Hypothetically speaking of course, I would figure this would fall into the catagory of defamation known as false light, in falsely portraying the appearance of a group of people voicing their venom when such is not actually the case. Should web records document such behavior... well, I wouldn't want to be on the other end of that legal discovery. People that would do such a thing just wouldn't be very smart. In my opinion, that is.
 
#3 ·
Of course, if what was being said was in fact true, then would it matter whether someone was posing as several private individuals to deliver the message? And if it is false (and known to be so or said with a reckless disregard for the truth) and harmful to the target's reputation, wouldn't it qualify as defamation regardless of whether the speaker was or was not posing as another person?

This is a good hypo.

Buck
 
#4 ·
Is Valdemort at it again?
 
#5 ·
I can't think who in the world would be crazy enough to talk to themselves in a forum and make it look like it's a group of people.
 
#6 ·
Are we talking about that alt.saxophone website? I subscribe to their postings but have never posted anything - btw Grumps, they love you over there. It is really a riot especially when you know who gets on a roll.

As far as "he who must not be named" website - its the sameo sameo everytime I visit - sometimes I talk to myself but I'm only a cupola other people at one time.
 
#7 ·
I suppose the legislations of many countries have provisions against impersonating someone who is using a false identity (ies) or publishing anything under false identities etcetera, etcetera......but , the problem is, as usual, one of jurisdiction. Where is this forum located? Who has jurisdiction on it? Is the hosting provider prepared to reveal the identity of the person who is , in theory, liable to have committed something illicit? If the location of the hosting is outside the jurisdiction of a country which recognizes laws or regulations against such an act there is no one to act against it. At the very most, if you can prove that there is something illicit going on, one could and only limited to certain countries , block a particular site .......but you need some considerable proof to do that and in many countries, such as the States within the protections offered by the 1st amendment. I think this would be next to impossible if the site doesn't show any pedo-pornography or terrorist content.
 
#8 ·
Not talking about the alt.music lunacy, but a privately run forum by an individual hypothetically posing as other named, but non-existing individuals; all of which could be traced by proper subpoena should it be occurring in the U.S. That is of course if it even has to be subpoenaed, as let's say the hypothetical tort-feasor, through error or ignorance, has left traces of his acts easily documented online. But anyhow, assume for this hypothetical situation that the tort-feasor resides in a U.S. state that recognizes false light defamation claims. I believe that posing as others in order to falsely portray that some sort of gang or group shares in the outrage to desparage another named individual, even if not in and of itself defamation per se, would clearly be grounds for a false light defamation claim. That's all.
 
#13 ·
some guy named John Talbott just wrote a book called "The 86 Biggest Lies on Wall Street". I think another guy with that name could write a book titled "The 86 Biggest Lies told by (you know who!)"
 
#17 ·
...........on the other hand, an expert of Rhetoric could ask an hypothetical question, such as this, in order to communicate by innuendo to the person(s) whom is-are involved in this (hypothetically assuming they are around here to read and think about this) , give them the chance to stop doing what they are doing, which, could be, albeit hypothetically, bordering a potentially unlawful act , without having to call their bluff in public if not absolutely necessary.
Hypothetically speaking........this would be the manner that I too would chose to fire a warning shot to someone, anyone,.......naturally this being in hypothetical situation, of course, and if this would be at all necessary among all the gentlemen and gentlewomen here.
 
#19 ·
...........on the other hand, an expert of Rhetoric could ask an hypothetical question, such as this, in order to communicate by innuendo to the person(s) whom is-are involved in this (hypothetically assuming they are around here to read and think about this) , give them the chance to stop doing what they are doing.......
Oh. so someone was actually doing that then. In that case, this of course, would be a rhetorical thread. My apologies. If, however, the reason for the expert of Rhetoric's hypothetical innuendo, was based purely upon supposition, rather than actual fact, then I would view the thread as presumtuous and paranoid.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top