Comments on: Wayne Crookes vs p2pnet: appeal decision http://www.p2pnet.net/story/28417 p2pnet.net - reader powered Wed, 01 Feb 2012 15:11:09 -0300 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: RG http://www.p2pnet.net/story/28417/comment-page-1#comment-983866 RG Thu, 17 Sep 2009 15:06:32 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/?p=28417#comment-983866 Jon, congratulations to you and Dan Burnett for settling this issue in a 2:1 decision before the BCCA. The Honorable Mr Justice Kelleher’s decision in the trial case about hyperlinking (in paragraph [34]) sets a sensible guideline. Jon, congratulations to you and Dan Burnett for settling this issue in a 2:1 decision before the BCCA. The Honorable Mr Justice Kelleher’s decision in the trial case about hyperlinking (in paragraph [34]) sets a sensible guideline.

]]> By: normal1515 http://www.p2pnet.net/story/28417/comment-page-1#comment-983844 normal1515 Thu, 17 Sep 2009 03:34:49 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/?p=28417#comment-983844 Linking is not a crime! Linking is not a crime!

]]> By: Monkey D. Luffy http://www.p2pnet.net/story/28417/comment-page-1#comment-983820 Monkey D. Luffy Wed, 16 Sep 2009 20:41:24 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/?p=28417#comment-983820 It shouldn't matter whether anyone clicked on the link or not. So now if you were to have a verbal conversation, and you said "Jack said John was an asshole" and Jack admitted he did indeed say that, YOU could be sued by John just for repeating correctly what you heard? It shouldn’t matter whether anyone clicked on the link or not. So now if you were to have a verbal conversation, and you said “Jack said John was an asshole” and Jack admitted he did indeed say that, YOU could be sued by John just for repeating correctly what you heard?

]]> By: Read This http://www.p2pnet.net/story/28417/comment-page-1#comment-983796 Read This Wed, 16 Sep 2009 12:59:20 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/?p=28417#comment-983796 B.C. Court of Appeal Rules No Liability For Linking http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4393/125/ http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4393/125/#comments Its not a hit of acid! Did you happen to catch this little nugget: [63] There was, however, evidence that Mr. Newton’s website which contained the hyperlinks to the impugned articles had been “viewed” (a word which counsel preferred to the word “hit” for reasons which remain unclear to me)... "a word which counsel preferred to the word “hit” for reasons which remain unclear to me" That's pretty sad this day and age. How can people who don't understand something even be allowed to rule on something? Jon Newton was lucky. Very lucky considering the decision was "divided". He has one more case against him for something an anon user wrote. Will he be lucky again? Will these geezers on the bench even know wtf they are reading or hearing? "A Hit", very difficult to grasp word. :/ I couldn't help but shake my head reading that. Also a "hit" doesn't mean the people clicked on the link. B.C. Court of Appeal Rules No Liability For Linking http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4393/125/

http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4393/125/#comments

Its not a hit of acid!

Did you happen to catch this little nugget:

[63] There was, however, evidence that Mr. Newton’s website which contained the hyperlinks to the impugned articles had been “viewed” (a word which counsel preferred to the word “hit” for reasons which remain unclear to me)…

“a word which counsel preferred to the word “hit” for reasons which remain unclear to me”

That’s pretty sad this day and age. How can people who don’t understand something even be allowed to rule on something?

Jon Newton was lucky. Very lucky considering the decision was “divided”.

He has one more case against him for something an anon user wrote. Will he be lucky again? Will these geezers on the bench even know wtf they are reading or hearing?

“A Hit”, very difficult to grasp word. :/ I couldn’t help but shake my head reading that.

Also a “hit” doesn’t mean the people clicked on the link.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/28417/comment-page-1#comment-983792 Reader's Write Wed, 16 Sep 2009 12:19:45 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/?p=28417#comment-983792 Why should someone be forced to remove a footnote because someone doesn't like the footnote? That's absurd. Notice and take down. Forcing people quiet. There should be no further argument. BTW, a commenter on Geists website notice a nice little part in the ruling. http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4393/125/#comments Why should someone be forced to remove a footnote because someone doesn’t like the footnote?

That’s absurd.

Notice and take down.

Forcing people quiet.

There should be no further argument.

BTW, a commenter on Geists website notice a nice little part in the ruling. http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4393/125/#comments

]]> By: Mark Francis http://www.p2pnet.net/story/28417/comment-page-1#comment-983790 Mark Francis Wed, 16 Sep 2009 11:47:51 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/?p=28417#comment-983790 Well, the problem is, the judges are still hung up as to whether or not someone used the link. If stats or witnesses were available showing that the link was used, or if you testified that you knew what was on the other side, they may have come to a different conclusion. They also left the door open for Crookes to go back to the trial judge over the issue of you not taking the links down when he sent you the legal notice to do so. It is important that people realize that this does not mean that they can hyperlink at will, or ignore legal notices. The chill is still very much there. We badly need legislation written to end this crap. Well, the problem is, the judges are still hung up as to whether or not someone used the link. If stats or witnesses were available showing that the link was used, or if you testified that you knew what was on the other side, they may have come to a different conclusion. They also left the door open for Crookes to go back to the trial judge over the issue of you not taking the links down when he sent you the legal notice to do so.

It is important that people realize that this does not mean that they can hyperlink at will, or ignore legal notices.

The chill is still very much there.

We badly need legislation written to end this crap.

]]> By: Mark http://www.p2pnet.net/story/28417/comment-page-1#comment-983788 Mark Wed, 16 Sep 2009 11:14:01 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/?p=28417#comment-983788 Well done, Jon, but I wonder how many people will understand how important this is? Anyway, all the best. Well done, Jon, but I wonder how many people will understand how important this is?

Anyway, all the best.

]]>