As to the rights and wrongs of posting an issue with a supplier, I read a while back of a supplier who was acting inappropriately in the supply of Nucs and other bee related items, there were/is a number of threads on the person.
Not intending to dig that issue up but indicate that in the past the forum has tolerated such posts.
Clearly the forum is administrated by those who’s name is on the door, liable and defamatory comments are an everyday danger to be rightfully safeguarded from more importantly for the owner.
Who the person is that is being ‘disrespected’ was suggested by another commenter, and possibly by the poster but it is suggested that the poster edited their post. Without knowing all the details is it possible they were showing responsibility? Just a thought.... it is one possible view.
I did find a balanced comment from another site on the subject [I will not post a link as it may lead to advertising...
]
I have underlined the last para perhaps it should be in the forum rules and a condition of being permitted to post on this forum. Admin?
Is not the good or bad service of any supply within this industry a reasonable subject for open discussion? If it is not then perhaps only threads directly related to day to day bee husbandry issues should be for discussion, lest exceptions be created and bad feeling begin to develop.
As for suppliers threatening to sue, if the comment is true and honest they can threaten forever, those threats should be posted so that we can choose not to buy their products and support admin in any fight that might ensue.
Quote >>>
“In the olden days...
Before the internet, the only people with the real power to communicate en masse to people were the newspapers, publishing houses and broadcasters. These organisations understood the risk of defamation and would employ people to read for defamation before something was published. That’s because under defamation law publishers are liable for defamation as much as authors. So, even taking a reader’s letter and reproducing it could potentially cause a newspaper to be liable as a publisher. Sometimes the publisher would take the risk of publishing in the interests of higher readership, other times it would not. But, it was always a calculated decision.
The internet changed all of that
With the advent of the internet, every person now has the ability to publish to a potentially wide audience and online forums increase the potential to reach that audience. The problem is that publication is now instantaneous and it is often impractical to check the content for defamation before it is posted on the web.
This exposes the regular person to claims of defamation and also this puts the forum owner in somewhat of a predicament since the forum owner could be categorised as the publisher of such material. But how does the forum owner know the content is defamatory? For a start, the content could be posted before they even become aware of it and secondly, they have no time or resources to employ defamation readers to give them an answer.
You see, what may appear defamatory may not be defamatory because there are several defences to defamation. Perhaps the most common defence is that of “truth”, namely that whatever was posted was true. There is a similar defence of honest opinion which can be relied upon where the opinion expressed was generally held (in other words there must be some facts to substantiate the opinion). But, for the forum operator, how can he or she decide whether one of these defences applies? It is extremely difficult without proper investigation or expert advice. Therefore, should the forum owner exercise a higher degree of editorial control similar to a newspaper editor or magazine publisher?
Editorial control or not?
A few recent cases on defamation (one in the UK and the other in NZ) indicate that if a forum owner exercises a high degree of editorial control that could make the forum owner more likely to be liable as a publisher of defamatory content. Whereas, if the forum owner can establish that he or she had very little control over what gets published on their website then the ability to escape liability may increase.
However, that’s not to say that having a wilful disregard for what is published on your website will help either. Certainly, if a forum owner is made aware of the defamatory content there would appear to be an expectation on the forum owner to go about removing it. If the forum owner hasn’t removed it within a reasonable time then liability may attach.
Some practical steps for forum owners
So what practical steps can a forum owner take to limit any exposure? Here are some suggestions:
• Explain on your website that you have no editorial control over the published content but will investigate complaints thoroughly;
• Implement a procedure whereby third parties can complain about defamatory content and if necessary you will take down the offending comment after you’ve carried out an investigation;
• Make it a condition of your terms of use that any comments posted on the forum must either be true or be genuinely held honest opinions. Have an option to terminate the membership of any user who submits a post which breaches this rule;
•
Require your users to indemnify you for any loss that you suffer as a result of comments posted by them. Then if you do get sued, potentially you can make a claim against the author to recover any loss which you suffer."
well thats my two penny worth...
