lawsuites over Topix
First Prev
of 3
Next Last
wow

Knoxville, TN

#1 Nov 21, 2012
Now people claim they can sue you over what you post on Topix. lol
NoNeedForAName

Paris, TN

#2 Nov 21, 2012
They can if it's defamatory and they can figure out who you are.
wow

Knoxville, TN

#3 Nov 21, 2012
they have to prove slander which is very hard to do and there is a thing called freedom of speech
Bums

United States

#4 Nov 21, 2012
Oh watch out everyone, now they have got all they can out of goodyear and then sue workmans comp. so here we in with topix. Can't get enough money! Oh my backs hurt so lets sue everyone! what a joke! people kill me with there free ride crap and hurt backs and then in play golf. don't you know workmans comp would love to get some of that money back?
NoNeedForAName

Paris, TN

#5 Nov 21, 2012
wow wrote:
they have to prove slander which is very hard to do and there is a thing called freedom of speech
It would actually be libel, not slander, since it's written. It's not always hard to prove--you only have to prove that it's false and that it was about you. It's the damages that are harder to prove than anything else.

Free speech has nothing to do with it. The First Amendment only applies to governmental action placing limitations on speech. It doesn't apply to private actions.
wow

United States

#6 Nov 21, 2012
wow wrote:
Now people claim they can sue you over what you post on Topix. lol
Wow! Another dumbass starting a thread that can't even spell lawsuits. Sue me!
wow

Knoxville, TN

#8 Nov 21, 2012
How to prove libel

There are several ways a person must go about proving that libel has taken place. For example, in the United States, first, the person must prove that the statement was false. Second, the person must prove that the statement caused harm. Third, the person must prove that the statement was made without adequate research into the truthfulness of the statement. These steps are for an ordinary citizen. For a celebrity or a public official, the person must prove the first three steps and that the statement was made with the intent to do harm or with reckless disregard for the truth.[citation needed] Usually specifically referred to as "proving malice".[13]
wow

Knoxville, TN

#9 Nov 21, 2012
The Supreme Court has clearly ruled that anonymous speech is protected speech in America. A 1995 decision holds that


Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical, minority views ... Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority.... It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation ... at the hand of an intolerant society.
wow

Knoxville, TN

#10 Nov 21, 2012
Freedom of speech is the political right to communicate one's opinions and ideas. The term freedom of expression is sometimes used synonymously, but includes any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used. In practice, the right to freedom of speech is not absolute in any country and the right is commonly subject to limitations, as with libel, slander, obscenity,[citation needed] sedition (including, for example inciting ethnic hatred), copyright violation, revelation of information that is classified or otherwise.

The right to freedom of expression is recognized as a human right under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and recognized in international human rights law in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Article 19 of the ICCPR states that "[e]veryone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference" and "everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice". Article 19 goes on to say that the exercise of these rights carries "special duties and responsibilities" and may "therefore be subject to certain restrictions" when necessary "[f]or respect of the rights or reputation of others" or "[f]or the protection of national security or of public order (order public), or of public health or morals".
wow

Knoxville, TN

#11 Nov 21, 2012
none the less lol there will always be folks that like to threaten harrass etc. I pity them
wow

Knoxville, TN

#12 Nov 21, 2012
Yup,
a subpoena would have to be issued to topix for the IP address (around $12000).
Then ARIN would have to tell you which service provider the ip space was registered to ($200)unless you are savey enough to do it yourself.
And lastly you have you to get a subpeona to the service provider for the customers information (Between $15000 - 30000) depending on the isps CALEA policies.
But you are right, its possible if money is no object.
wow

Knoxville, TN

#13 Nov 21, 2012
Just for public awareness:

You know the police can't just "trace an IP address" right? That is only in TV.

Here's what they CAN do.

Get a subpoena for Topix to hand over IP records for that post.(This takes time and MONEY)

Once the IP is obtained (if obtained and not fought by Topix), they can then find out the Internet Service Provider (ISP) that leased out that IP address.

Now you have to go back to and request a NEW subpoena for the ISP to give you the name and address on the account that leased that IP Address at that time and date.(Yes. most ISP use dynamically assigned IP's that can change at any time. it isn't like a phone number)

Once the police have the ACCOUNT NAME AND ADDRESS from the ISP they can stop by the home. If this home has more than one person in it, and especially more than one computer, the next part is next to impossible. Your home router uses the IP assigned by the ISP.

All communication out of your home is through that IP regardless of who is using it. EVERYONE on that router is on the same IP on the internet. You have individual IPs on your home network, but are irrelevant on an outside network like your connection with the ISP

Now the police have to determine WHICH person in the home posted the insulting or slanderous comment. The only way you could is take all the computers in the home and have investigated by Computer Forensics (EXPENSIVE) or interrogate every member of the household. That would be bad press usually.

Most police departments would not go through this timely and costly procedure and would only pursue internet slander if it was wide spread, costing people MASSIVE amounts of money, or you hire a criminal attorney to pursue the case for you.

TL;DR - Every step of this is expensive and not worth it unless the suspect was causing major monetary or physical damages. This ain't CSI.

I hope you all learned something that didn't know these things :)
agree

Jackson, TN

#14 Nov 21, 2012
wow wrote:
Yup,
a subpoena would have to be issued to topix for the IP address (around $12000).
Then ARIN would have to tell you which service provider the ip space was registered to ($200)unless you are savey enough to do it yourself.
And lastly you have you to get a subpeona to the service provider for the customers information (Between $15000 - 30000) depending on the isps CALEA policies.
But you are right, its possible if money is no object.
Yes, it is very hard to get an IP address.
wow

Knoxville, TN

#15 Nov 21, 2012
wow wrote:
<quoted text>Wow! Another dumbass starting a thread that can't even spell lawsuits. Sue me!
..........lol the grammer police on patrol
NoNeedForAName

Paris, TN

#16 Nov 21, 2012
wow wrote:
The Supreme Court has clearly ruled that anonymous speech is protected speech in America. A 1995 decision holds that
Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical, minority views ... Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority.... It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation ... at the hand of an intolerant society.
Right, and just like I said before, only in the context of government infringement on speech. That case was McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission, which challenged a law that prohibited anonymous campaign literature.

The First Amendment does not apply to private civil actions between citizens. Period. Read the case before you try to tell us what it means.
NoNeedForAName

Paris, TN

#17 Nov 21, 2012
wow wrote:
How to prove libel
There are several ways a person must go about proving that libel has taken place. For example, in the United States, first, the person must prove that the statement was false. Second, the person must prove that the statement caused harm. Third, the person must prove that the statement was made without adequate research into the truthfulness of the statement. These steps are for an ordinary citizen. For a celebrity or a public official, the person must prove the first three steps and that the statement was made with the intent to do harm or with reckless disregard for the truth.[citation needed] Usually specifically referred to as "proving malice".[13]
We're just copying and pasting from uncited Wikipedia articles now?

Regardless of what Wiki tells you, you don't have to prove that the statement was made without adequate research into the truthfulness of the statement, unless the victim is a public figure.

With public figures, you have to prove that the statement was made with "actual malice", which the Supreme Court has defined to mean that the statement was made with reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of the statement.

That actual malice bit is from New York Times v. Sullivan, if anyone wants to look it up.
Catch me

United States

#18 Nov 21, 2012
How are you gonna get an IP address of somebody using their smartphone off the wi fi at the library, coffee shop, or McDonald's? Lmao.
wow

Knoxville, TN

#19 Nov 21, 2012
Perhaps few human rights have ever received the legal, political and social scrutiny of the concept of freedom of speech. The first amendment to the United States' Constitution, along with similar passages in the framework documents of other countries, addresses this basic right of citizens to express themselves through written and oral speech. The difficulty with enforcing this ideal of freedom of speech, however, lies with the definition of "free speech" and the rights of governments to restrict or censor potentially dangerous forms of speech.

In essence, much of the original Constitution's content can be boiled down into one sentence: "Let's not do it like England." British laws concerning the rights of citizens to express dissenting thoughts against the government were notoriously strict. The very act of producing a pamphlet or newspaper denouncing the British government was grounds for very severe punishment. When the framers of the Constitution decided to amend the original document, the idea of "freedom of speech," especially where it concerned criticism of the government, became a top priority.

Freedom of speech in a legal sense, however, does not protect every single word ever uttered or written by individuals. The First Amendment primarily guarantees that the government itself would not infringe on the right of a "free press" to publish articles critical of the government. Citizens also had the right to "redress grievances," which meant they could legally assemble in public areas and deliver speeches without fear of government reprisal.
wow

Knoxville, TN

#20 Nov 21, 2012
Catch me wrote:
How are you gonna get an IP address of somebody using their smartphone off the wi fi at the library, coffee shop, or McDonald's? Lmao.
AGREED but some folks think they are super human and move mountains.lol.or they just like to make idle threats.lol
wow

Knoxville, TN

#21 Nov 21, 2012
Thanks for everyones opinons. This has been a nice discussion. Makes one stop and think aboujust how CRAZY this old world and some people are. Happy Thanksgiving to all

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Union City Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Calvary Baptist Church 5 min hopeful 13
Heath and Robin cuntingham 15 min Nowwhtamigonado 3
white trash Marley wilkins 20 min GEDI_MASTER91 11
Why more fences at graham park? 24 min GrassAss 7
Spanking 1 hr hopeful 3
Party house 4 hr guest 15
Roll Your Own 4 hr JudgeJoeBrown 20
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Union City Mortgages