Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!seismo!lll-crg!styx!mcb
From: mcb@styx.UUCP (Michael C. Berch)
Newsgroups: net.news,net.religion,net.legal
Subject: Re: Libel?
Message-ID: <20525@styx.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 27-Mar-86 13:41:09 EST
Article-I.D.: styx.20525
Posted: Thu Mar 27 13:41:09 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 20-Apr-86 11:27:23 EST
References: <2749@pyuxd.UUCP> <2773@pyuxd.UUCP> <2789@pyuxd.UUCP> <12685@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Reply-To: mcb@styx.UUCP (Michael C. Berch)
Distribution: net
Organization: Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, Livermore CA
Lines: 42
Summary: No.

> [Flamage and accusation of libel/slander by Matthew Weiner against
>  Rich Rosen, and "complaint" to "powers that be" about Rich's postings...]

To be brief, the postings Mr. Weiner complains about do NOT comprise 
defamation, for a number of sufficient reasons, the most important of
which is that they are obviously, beyond any shadow of doubt, to any
conceivable reader of the newsgroup(s), OPINION. Though I am an
attorney (among other things), I don't feel the need to post a discourse on 
the law of defamation, but I DO feel the need to defend freedom of
expression in general, Usenet in specific, and Rich Rosen in particular.

What irks me particularly is that Mr. Weiner has posted (by my count)
at least nine articles to net.religion during the last two weeks (the
expiration period on our machine), more than half of which contain
flamage, accusations of bias, emotional language, and the like. 
Why, then, does he find it necessary to single out various paragraphs
of Rich Rosen's articles (which, out of context, seem to me more puzzling 
than offensive) and cry foul?

The reason I care enough about this to post this is that Usenet exists
by the sufferance of the management of hundreds of private firms and
government agencies, many of whom would be inclined to drop
participation if the net became more controversial than it already is.
Mr. Weiner's inaccurate allegations of defamation do nothing to
improve this sitation. Whether the net or its members could be held
liable for postings if in fact defamatory articles were posted is a
issue for another time; I'd advise those interested to read the
material presented at the January 1985 Usenix conference by the noted
attorney Susan Nycum and some of the research done by Lauren Weinstein
with regard to the Stargate project.

I do not presume to give legal advice to Mr. Weiner, and if he
continues to feel be has been defamed (after the legal research
he should have done in the first place) I urge him to seek counsel.
My belief, however, is that his remedy is to continue to publish his
opinions in the appropriate newsgroups (NOT net.news!) or else leave
the net if he considers the tone of discourse offensive.

Michael C. Berch
attorney, consultant, and news administrator
ARPA: mcb@lll-tis-b.ARPA
UUCP: {ihnp4,dual}!lll-lcc!styx!mcb