Online Libel vs Free Speech
p2pnet.net News:- Earlier today we ran a story emphasising that the California Supreme Court, "is leaning toward dismissing a lawsuit against a woman who posted an allegedly libelous email".
Quoting an Associated Press story, we said woman’s health advocate Ilena Rosenthal had posted an opinion piece from a man whom the doctors also are suing for libel and, ‘The widely watched case included briefs from some of the Internet’s biggest names, including Amazon.com, America Online, eBay, Google, Microsoft and Yahoo, all of which took the defendant’s side for fear that a ruling against her could also open them up to the same type of liability.’
Congress has treated the Internet, ‘much differently than newspapers, which are liable for what they print,’ said the item. ‘The treatment varies largely to not hinder the free flow of massive amounts of information available to anyone with Internet access.
In a comment post, Rosenthal says:
Thank you so much for covering this. I am the defendant named in this case, now called Barrett Vs Rosenthal. Stephen Barrett, the head of the so called Quackbuster Team, has already lost all his appeals to me in this SLAPP suit. He has made a career out of suing activists and medical professionals with whom he disagrees and waging Smear Campaigns against us.
http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/QuackWatchWatch.htm
Please note that the plaintiff attorney quoted, Christopher Grell, as a plaintiff, also sued me for libel even though I had never mentioned his name.
He had refused to drop his case against me until he was before Superior Court Judge Richmond and claimed he had not "meant" to sue me.
I was also sued for "being in conspiracy" with people to this day I have never communicated with and know about only because they are co-defendants in this SLAPP suit. The plaintiffs frequently use the threat of more litigation on Usenet and on their Healthfraud Board. During this case, talk radio owners were threatened with libel suits for having me on. Etc. Etc. Etc.
Here is but one example of attempting to silence by lawsuit. Terry Polevoy here is threatening someone discussing this case on the Healthfraud Board:
Since September 5th when the California Supreme Court Justices heard Oral Arguments in this case, both Grell and Polevoy have made some absurd and potentially libelous statements about me.
Grell publicized that I republished " libelous material that she knows is false."
This is blatantly untrue and I have clearly discussed the allegedly libelous material in declarations in this case, under penalty of perjury – www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/Polevoy.htm.
Plaintiff Terry Polevoy has also been making this claim. During this case, he was found posting disguised as a woman (Vera Teasdale) attacking me and other defendants, and advertising for himself in fifty posts on Usenet.
Thank you for your interest in this unfolding case.
So what does this have to do with p2pnet, apart from the obvious?
Here’s what the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) said in 2001:
In a trail-blazing 27-page order, Alameda Superior Court Judge James A. Richman dismissed a defamation lawsuit filed against a breast implant awareness activist, finding that it was a meritless SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation). The court held that a 1996 federal law protects individuals from civil liability for posting to an Internet newsgroup a statement created by another.
Ilena Rosenthal, Director of the Humantics Foundation in San Diego, was sued for defamation based on her postings on Internet newsgroups. On July 25, 2001, Judge Richman granted Rosenthal’s motion to dismiss the complaint against her as a meritless SLAPP. Two self-proclaimed "Quackbusters," Stephen Barrett, M.D., of Allentown, Pennsylvania, and Terry Polevoy, M.D., of Canada, joined by their attorney and co-plaintiff, Christopher Grell, of Oakland, California, filed suit against the activist. Judge Richman found that none of the plaintiffs had valid claims against Rosenthal. He ruled that Rosenthal’s statements calling Barrett and Polevoy "quacks," and Barrett "arrogant" and a "bully" who tried to "extort" her, were not actionable because "they do not contain provably false assertions of fact, but rather are expressions of subjective judgment."
Judge Richman further found that only one statement by Rosenthal was arguably defamatory – a document written by someone else which Rosenthal re-posted to an Internet newsgroup. Judge Richman held that this statement by Rosenthal was protected under section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act (CDA), a law Congress enacted in 1996 expressly "to promote the continued development of the Internet and other interactive computer services," which Congress declared should be "unfettered by Federal or State regulation."
Judge Richman held that section 230 of the CDA "provides immunity to users, as well as providers, of interactive computer services." He found that Rosenthal, "as a user of an interactive computer service, that is, a newsgroup, . . . is not the publisher or speaker" of statements made by a third person. Thus, Judge Richman concluded, "she cannot be civilly liable for posting it on the Internet. She is immune."
Lee Tien, Senior Staff Attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), the leading Internet civil liberties organization, said "in enacting section 230, Congress tried to protect free speech on the Internet from chilling threats of costly litigation. This decision will help achieve that goal and marks a solid victory for free expression. Internet speech would be stifled if individuals could be found liable for the defamatory statements of others."
Mark Goldowitz, counsel for defendant Rosenthal and the Director of the California Anti-SLAPP Project, said, "Judge Richman’s opinion is significant. To my knowledge, this is the first court to rule that Internet re-posting is immune from civil liability under federal law. This ruling greatly advances freedom of speech on the Internet. Also, it is very rare for a trial court judge to issue anything even close to a 27-page order."
Ilena Rosenthal, one of several defendants named in this high-profile Internet libel case, heads an international support group for women harmed by breast implants. Rosenthal believes that this suit, one of several the so-called "Quackbusters" have filed against critics of their tactics, has been used to intimidate and threaten others into silence for fear of being named as a "Doe" in this lawsuit. "They are a dominant threat to alternative and complementary medical practices and practitioners," Rosenthal said. "Their campaigns obstruct health freedom and attempt to chill the voices of their critics and opponents.
Also See:
allegedly libelous email – US judge criticizes Net libel, September 12, 2005
2001 – Court Rules That Internet Re-Posting Is Protected Speech, July 30, 2001
p2pnet newsfeeds for your site.
rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss
Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
September 13th, 2006 at 5:29 am
Obsessive posting by Ilena Rosenthal continues to destroy lives.
If Ms. Rosenthal was a McDonald’s restaurant starting out she’d have to erect a big sign in her front yard announcing to the world just how many people she has served with defamatory slings and arrows over the last decade on the internet.
Unfortunately, her views on reality don’t exactly seem to be correcting themselves since the lawsuit that she claims to be winning is far from over from.
Tens of thousands of posts, thousands of defamatory comments about individuals, institutions, organizations, just don’t seem to bother her. And it certainly doesn’t seem to bother the EFF, or the ACLU either.
She is a Usenet terrorist who blindly strikes out against anyone. She is obsessed without reason. And the major problem is that almost nobody in the press seems to care.
September 13th, 2006 at 6:34 pm
LOL … sounds like Terry the Terror Polevoy yet again, whining and distorting the facts with his maniacal projections while hiding his identity. Coward.
Tell us about “Vera Teasdale” Terror and how you donned her disguise to attack me and others in your insane suits until you foolishly posted your own email with her address. LOL
Tell us about all the people you’ve threatened to sue and have sued for posting the facts about you. YOU personify what you scream is “Libel Chill”… especially on your Healthfraud list where anyone who doesn’t toestep to the Healthfraud Regime Propaganda immediately gets censored and threatened.
Ilena Rosenthal
(log-in isn’t working … I’m not anonymous .. just can’t log-in.)
http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/Polevoy.htm
http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/Truehope.htm
Polevoy’s attempts to stop scientific research overturned
http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/QuackWatchWatch.htm
For my work on raising awareness of the dangers of breast implants, (and the Propaganda Teams hired by Industry) please visit:
http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.org
September 14th, 2006 at 2:29 am
September 14th, 2006 at 12:41 pm
Ilena,
He follows you everywhere ???
Isn’t that stalking ?
September 14th, 2006 at 1:35 pm
There is nothing free about the very limited speech all are allowed in limited places.
Doesn’t it cost $50million for the necessary speech to get elected american president? Nothing free there.
Does it not it cost a fortune to beat a speech rap (called defamation)? Nothing free there.
Is it not true that in a court trial if you are not one of the lawyers, you may not talk to or ask a question to the judge? No free speech there either?
Is it not true that reporters cannot ask off topic questions to politicians at a press conference? No free speech here either.
Is it not true that you cannot ask a lady her age? No free speech here either.
Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com
September 14th, 2006 at 2:11 pm
Certainly feels like it.
His “publicists” hired a Private Investigator who staked out an ex partner’s of mine home in San Diego and was found dumpster diving where I receive my mail.
Then a couple of months later two of his publicists announced their arrival in Costa Rica …after Polevoy had been ranting on about my physical location for months.
Just months before that he was outed on Usenet donning the disguise of “Vera Teasdale” to continue his defamation of me and others he is suing …
For more …
http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/Polevoy.htm
September 14th, 2006 at 9:34 pm
There is more to the story than what is contained in the article. Rosenthal continuously whines about being sued by Polevoy and Barrett.
However, she sued several people and AOL a few years back for EXACTLY THE BEHAVIOR SHE ENGAGES IN. She lost the case and was assessed court costs and attorney’s fees, which to date, she has not paid.
Instead, she has fled the United States to Costa Rica, to avoid legal process.
The article she gleefully reposted was written by Timothy Bolen, who is her co-defendant. He, like Rosenthal, threatens anyone who challenges him with a lawsuit. You can read the multiple threads in news.admin.net-abuse.email where his antics are discussed.
Rosenthal and Bolen proclaim themselves champions of free speech, while they will do anything they can to stifle those who disagree with them.
Rosenthal, thy name is H Y P O C R I T E.
September 14th, 2006 at 11:03 pm
You won’t leave her alone, and you follow her everywhere Dr.
Looks like you’re not only a stalker, you’re also a coward.
September 14th, 2006 at 11:04 pm
How many times can 1 person post pretending to be different people, Dr. ??
September 14th, 2006 at 11:07 pm
AND she signs her own name in, Dr,
while you stalk anonymously in the shadows, like a
cockroach.
Identify yourself, as she does.
MAYBE, you’ll have some credibility.
September 14th, 2006 at 11:35 pm
Ilena Rosenthal lives in the shadows, she stalks from the shadows. She has managed to do so, without repercussion for quite sometime. Check out her address. It’s a UPS Store mailbox, not a residence or office.
Try serving her legal notice for first person libel, not the third party libel she’s currently in litigation for. She’s performed plenty of it.
Somehow Ilena Rosenthal’s legal representers seem to believe the internet should be above the laws of common society. Yes, there should be Free Speech. But there should be ramnifications for libel on the net, just as there are for the news media, or any other public audience.
Slander, defamation, and libel can be harmful when it occurs. Ilena Rosenthal should not hide behind the untamed internet to continue her harm.
I can understand ISPs and net providers being concerned about repercussion from certain laws like this. However, the court in it’s good judgment, can continue to make slanders, defamers, and libelers guilty of the offenses they perpetrate, just as they always have in every other public venue. Once a perpetrator has been found guilty of such an act, the ISP or internet provider should be put on notice to remove any offensive webpages or material from their servers, or be found equally guilty of the offense.
September 14th, 2006 at 11:54 pm
Why are places like Amazon.com, AOL, etc worried? They are service providers and should not be sued for what their customers post.
This woman on the other hand acted as an individual, not a service provider. Even if she posted something bad that was something someone else might have wrote, she was told it was wrong information and harmful. But she continued to repost it and that shows she didn’t care about what she was saying. It was very rude.
September 15th, 2006 at 12:03 am
No .. seriously, I am not the same person, honest.
i’m not really that Dr in disguise. What kind of loser would do
that
September 15th, 2006 at 12:53 pm
> AND she signs her own name in, Dr,
> while you stalk anonymously in the shadows, like a
> cockroach.
> Identify yourself, as she does.
> MAYBE, you’ll have some credibility.
1) Do not assume that a doctor is the only one who Rosenthal has defamed. Her victims are many. Her defamatory web pages are legion.
2) When dealing with a self confessed stalker such as rosenthal, maintaining anonymity is always a wise move. She has contacted wives of men who do not accept her abuse and implied that these men have a purient interest in her.
3) Complaining that anonymity lessens credibility when you remain anonymous demonstrates a logical defect in your “thinking”.
September 15th, 2006 at 12:56 pm
> You won’t leave her alone, and you follow her everywhere Dr.
> Looks like you’re not only a stalker, you’re also a coward.
I am not a doctor, just one of her many victims. As for leaving her alone, she has stalked and harassed one man on Usenet for years. He has begged her to leave him alone, and she emailed his wife instead.
She is the coward, hiding in Costa Rica.
September 15th, 2006 at 4:21 pm
No defect in MY thinking Dr.
i see no “self confession” of stalking.
I only see you following her here , in nearly every thread
she posts in.
Calling her a “stalker” anonymously carries much less weight than
you actually stalking her does.
So, continue following her around in every thead.
You show just who and what you really are.
Coward and fool, Dr.
September 15th, 2006 at 4:24 pm
LOL,
So let me get this straight …
To prove she’s a stalker, you follow HER around in every thread,
and follow her at every site.
Stalking her, basically Dr.
Makes perfect sense.
ROFL
September 15th, 2006 at 7:05 pm
Anonymous Coward lied:
>As for stalking…she is a self-confessed internet stalker.
I have stalked no one.
When two of Polevoy / Barrett’s Teammates made the destruction of my life their business, ever claiming that it was “personal” and not their propaganda businesses, I contacted their wives via polite emails.
I do not believe by any definition of the word this is stalking.
Details are here:
Andrew M Langer is one of Polevoy/Barrett’s Rag-tag Posse Members and spent months interrogating me and lying about my foundation before I contacted his wife. He claimed that it was personal … not in conjunction with his busienss as a Corporate PR flack … and he refused to leave me alone. Details are here.
http://www.humanticsfoundation.com/langervsilena.html
Disbarred NY attorney, Mark S Probert, used fake names to attempt to infiltrate my support group and then called my home / office and threatened me.
Several years later, admittedly I waited longer than I should have, I emailed his wife with his frightening activities.
Details are here. BTW … he has repeatedly lied about his disbarrment.
http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/sandraprobert.htm
To see them in cahoots with Polevoy (Coward beyond imagination), click here and visit their “Rag Tag Posse” … that’s why they proudly call themselves.
http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/QuackWatchWatch.htm
September 15th, 2006 at 8:50 pm
“She is the coward, hiding in Costa Rica. ”
I suppose …
If I had some rich doctors and lawyers following me around,
doing anything and everything that their money and power can
provide to destroy my life, I just might hide too.
So,
Nothing to fear … who are you then ??