Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!glacier!kestrel!king
From: king@kestrel.ARPA (Dick King)
Newsgroups: net.consumers
Subject: Re: Sears
Message-ID: <4829@kestrel.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 13-Feb-86 18:07:00 EST
Article-I.D.: kestrel.4829
Posted: Thu Feb 13 18:07:00 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 15-Feb-86 03:33:35 EST
Organization: Kestrel Institute, Palo Alto, CA
Lines: 30


   From: jay@imagen.UUCP (Jay Jaeckel)
   Newsgroups: net.consumers
   Date: 7 Feb 86 18:28:54 GMT

   A small naive voice inside my head keeps saying "If only Sears could see
   this, the SURE MIGHT DO something:  They'd sue the ass off of everyone
   who posted dirt on them!"
	I went to the library a few weeks ago and read a little bit on libel
   laws (having had a previous employer whom I have occasionally considered
   blowing the whistle on).  Turn out, apparently, that disclosing dirt about
   someone can get you into deep shit, and that the truth of your dirt (even
   if you can PROVE it, which you often can't) is at best usually a weak
   defense which MIGHT get the court to reduce the damages awarded against you.

	So:  question to all posters of negative (but VALUABLE, I think)
   consumer information on companies/products/services you have dealt with:
   Aren't you awfully worried that the wrong predatory lawyers are going to
   see your postings, and crucify you???  Another question:  Is there any
   fairness or honesty at all in the libel laws, if I read them right?

Seems likely that Sears (for example) would have trouble proving the
identity of the alledged libeler in the case of netmail.  I wouldn't
worry about that, for that reason alone!

					   -- Jay Jaeckel
					   ...{ucbvax,decwrl}!imagen!jay



-dick