Libel – and Privilege

[Kharon]

Unabashed ignorance and vagrant curiosity prompts the post; probably brought on by Pprune reading. :ugh:

In a nutshell – how far can 'professional privilege' be pushed. I mean – if say you 'published' a professional opinion (assuming a professional background); where is the fine line drawn ?.

The 'Kalgoorlie rules'; y' pays ya money and takes ya chances, whilst eloquent in their simplicity, don't seem to quite cut it today. How far can you reasonably take it out, without being in dire straits??. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/confused.gif

Genuine, sincere question for our esteemed legal colleagues. Yours fascinated. :D

[Seaeagle109]

Kharon,

I'm not a legal eagle either and I also had my curiousity peeked by some of the posts in another thread, and so I posted a link to a legal website on Defamation/ Libel Laws in Australian Electronic media.

You might find the information is useful.

Australian Defamation Laws and the Internet (http://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Censor/defamation.html)

The fact that the truth isn't always a defence was an eye opener to me.

How this relates to a professional opinion or professional priveledge, I have no idea.

Seaeagle109

"A Man's character is his fate", Heroclitus, 535-475 BC

[tail wheel]

If you are talking posts made on PPRuNe, this site is "published" in the State of California where the legal system provides for:

A Doe subpoena is a subpoena that seeks the identity of an unknown defendant to a lawsuit. Most jurisdictions permit a plaintiff who does not yet know a defendant's identity to file suit against John Doe and then use the tools of the discovery process to seek the defendant's true name. A Doe subpoena is often served on an online service provider or ISP for the purpose of identifying the author of an anonymous post.

And:

A strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) is a lawsuit that is intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.

The typical SLAPP plaintiff does not normally expect to win the lawsuit. The plaintiff's goals are accomplished if the defendant succumbs to fear, intimidation, mounting legal costs or simple exhaustion and abandons the criticism. A SLAPP may also intimidate others from participating in the debate. A SLAPP is often preceded by a legal threat.

Forget about fairness and the rules of libel and defamation. It is not necessary for a plaintiff to prove libel or defamation in order to obtain the IP address and any other information held by the publisher of a web site such as PPRuNe. In general, there is no defence to a SLAPP Subpoena.

PPRuNe has received a number of SLAPP Subpoenas in recent times. One airline in particular does not wish to be discussed in what it perceives are derogatory terms. A SLAPP Subpoena may request and obtain the identities of many users who have posted on PPRuNe (I think one SLAPP Subpoena sought details on 40 plus posts) and many of those posts may be totally innocent and mundane.

Be very careful before you press the "Submit Reply" button! :=

And don't admonish Mods for deleting posts and threads when Mods are probably aware of other considerations and delete posts or threads in order to protect you, our registered users. :=

[Kharon]

Thanks - No, not intending to push any great big buttons, as stated; vagrant curiosity was all.

Thing that kicked it off was a yarn I heard (in the Pub) in which the "Bad sayer" could not be got at by the "Call ee". Seems there is a 'thing' professional privilage (I think ?) that allows for professional opinion to be a defence. Could be all rubbish, But always happy to head good advice. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif It's a murky old world though, ain't it.

.

[tail wheel]

It's a murky old world though, ain't it.

Not at all. For a few dollars in Californian attorney fees, one can get any personal information from a bulletin board, whether or not the posts are libelous or defamatory.

[mcgrath50]

So why does PPRuNe remain hosted in California and not get server space in a more privacy friendly nation?

[Kharon]

Mac50 - what was it Dempsey said; "you can run, but you can't hide". :D

And, there's the bit about "first let's kill all the lawyers". Nuff - time for an Ale. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

[Creampuff]

Kharon

You are confusing ‘qualified privilege’ with ‘legal professional privilege’.

Google ‘qualified privilege’. :ok:

[Kharon]

CP – Efharisto poli. (Greek Easter and all).

There are some clever, clever folk in this world. I have always loved to watch a 'pro' doing what they do best, and these lads are good. I don't mean smart, I mean “good” in the true sense of the word; reasonable and reasoned, fascinating stuff. The following links are recommended; great for reading over quiet coffee or ale. Qualified privilege (ttp://www.lawhandbook.sa.gov.au/ch14s05s05.php)

Fair comment (ttp://www.lawhandbook.sa.gov.au/ch14s05s05.php)

Could not resist this – it's on my list for a little more reading.
Fair comment

Lord Birkett said in 1951 - 'It is the right of every man to comment freely, fairly and honestly on any matter of public interest.' This principle means it is not defamatory when words are an expression of opinion and not a statement of fact. It may be difficult to determine if words are statements of facts or expressions of opinion. Words must be construed in their context and in some circumstances words that would otherwise be statements of fact might be viewed as comments.

The opinion, however, must be fair and based upon facts which the defendant can identify and prove to be true. It must also be honestly held and not motivated by malice (some improper or dishonest motive). Personal ill will by the defendant towards the plaintiff is an example of malice.

'Public interest' is a wide concept involving what is a legitimate concern to the public. Instances include the conduct of people holding public office, the conduct of a political party, the conduct of a clergyman and artistic works such as plays and books. It extends as far as the criticism of a restaurant's food in a newspaper review.

The Defamation Act 2005 s.29 provides a defence of honest opinion where the expression of opinion is related to a matter of public interest and based on ‘proper material’ that is substantially true or based on privileged material.
Yup, that's what I call interesting. :D http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif. The Bar Barristers club will loose some beers now. Probably end up in a punch up. :D

[T28D]

At the end of the day Defamation ( Libel ) is the devils work, nothing good comes from a Defo action.

Likewise nothing good comes from pursuing Defo.

Reasoned people stand toe to toe and debate out their issues, Defo is only for those who simply lack the intestinal fortitude to confront their demons and work the problem out.

[Sarcs]

'Public interest' is a wide concept involving what is a legitimate concern to the public. Instances include the conduct of people holding public office, the conduct of a political party, the conduct of a clergyman and artistic works such as plays and books. It extends as far as the criticism of a restaurant's food in a newspaper review.

The Defamation Act 2005 s.29 provides a defence of honest opinion where the expression of opinion is related to a matter of public interest and based on ‘proper material’ that is substantially true or based on privileged material.

The "Public Interest" factor seems to be the 'common factor' in common and criminal law.

Sadly the 'Public Interest' factor also seems to have been blurred and lost in the mist over the last thirty to forty years, maybe that is why in 'today's world' we need a Wikileaks etc to 'keep the bastards honest'!:ok:

It is also interesting to note how the "model litigators" all profess to adhere to the principle of the 'Public Interest' in their publically available fluffy (K's phrase that is apt) documentation/governances (see CDPP example here:http://www.cdpp.gov.au/Publications/ProsecutionPolicy/ProsecutionPolicy.pdf ), yet when it comes to practise they all go into damage control, or ego mania, or "it wasn't me officer", or (like MT in another thread) bury their head in the sand!

Hey Mick T this is for you mate, from Sophocles god bless his soul:
"The kind of man who always thinks that he is right, that his opinions, his pronouncements, are the final word, when once exposed shows nothing there. But a wise man has much to learn without a loss of dignity."

[gobbledock]

Is it still libel if you don't name a particular person by his/her true name but instead one uses a nickname that alludes to a particular person but doesn't directly name them?
And for example what about an organization or a structure as a whole? For example rather than name a particular politician or even a particular party one might say something like 'Australian governments are all complete ****e and the corridors are filled with politicians who are as useless as a lump of camel ****e'. Is this still potentially a case of libel?

As for prune being a Californian entity I think that is very cool. It explains Tailwheels strong accent and southern tan !!!

[kaz3g]

Tailwheelsaid that this site is published in the State of California and discussed the prickly problem that are SLAPP writs.

Please be assured that this site is also published in Australia and writs can be issued here, too. Just ask Joe Gutnik!

In his case, the High Court held that the act of publishing occurs at the place where the site is "opened" ie where it is accessed by the viewer. Even though the website was managed in New York and the material was loaded on it there, it was opened and read by subscribers in Australia and Joe's reputatin was consequently diminished by the words said about him.

Kaz

[haughtney1]

The trick at avoiding any legal action as was described to me by a fellow who should know...
Establish an online persona via a public IP address, preferably somewhere that offers free wifi (airports and coffe shops are ideal), secondly use a secure VPN connection based in an Internet friendly jurisdiction (did someone mention Sweden?), ensure that if your publically accessible IP location is indeed public, be sure there is no actual physical or electronic trace of you at this location i.e. pay cash, cell phone off, hat, dark glasses etc etc...
Lastly, be unpredictable in your movements.
If they find you after those efforts, then they are likely to be the NSA or some other well resourced security service....in which case mayby you should have known better:E

[Worrals in the wilds]

Tail wheel, do you guys let users know if someone is sniffing around seeking their details?

[Tableview]

More than 35 years ago, I was threatened with legal action and R15000 (at the time, a fortune, about three years salary!) was demanded from me by the lawyers of the GM of the company I worked for, because I had written to the Chairman of the company in its home country exposing him as a liar, cheat, fraud, and thief.

I still remember going to my Cape Town PO Box on a sunny Sunday afternoon on the way back from the beach, and collecting my mail, amongst which was this letter from a firm of shyster lawyers in Johannesburg. I felt as if my wolrd had ended. I wish I could find the letter and no doubt have it somewhere.

Fortunately I had a lawyer friend and after a sleepless night was in his office the next morning. He told me that although it was foolish to have done what I did, if I had documentary evidence of his fraudulent acts against the company, and thius could prove my contentions to be true, I had little to fear. I did, and nothing further happened.

[tail wheel]

Worrals, a contentious issue and the cause of much angst in our Admin Forum. :(

The site publishers now advise the Mods when a subpoena is received but the requested details are still provided by return.

A subpoena was received by the publishers late last year resulting in around 40 user details being provided, including the details of a Mod. The Mods were not advised until after the event which led to some rather terse confrontations.

In the instances of SLAPP Subpoenas that have occurred, the aim has been to harrass and intimidate PPRuNe users rather than initiate defamation action. The airline initiated the subpoena was probably looking for it's "disloyal" staff and anyone else it could intimidate.

haughtney1. What you suggest may be possible, but rather improbable. You could access PPRuNe via a free Proxy Server in another country - e.g. Hide my Ass (http://www.hidemyass.com/) or one of hundreds of others in different countries - but I don't know how secure they are considering they also probably record your home IP address.

Then there is your profile email address and a determined litigant could also seek IP details and email contents from your email service provider. With an IP address, a subpoena to, for example, social networking sites for IP matching and *bingo* - your identity, personal details, possibly employer, known friends etc, all laid bare. Social networking sites are potentially very dangerous, as many have already discovered.

The internet is not some great big annonymous party. A few dollars and a little determination and it is relatively simple to trace individuals.

[Worrals in the wilds]

Okay, thanks.
One would assume that the intent of such subpoenas was to investigate possible breaches of defamation law or track down cyber stalkers et al, not 'harass and intimidate' people with an opinion. Oh well, I suppose if we all got a dollar every time laws were used for purposes other than what was intended, we'd be too rich to hang around here. :*

That said, publically criticising a current employer has always been an extreme sport, whether the criticism is expressed at the pub or online.

Was the subpoena in relation to DG&P content, or another sub forum? Did anything nasty come of it?

[tail wheel]

I posted above:

A strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) is a lawsuit that is intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.

In the instances I am aware of involving PPRuNe I don't think there was ever any intention of defamation action.

I believe the site publishers may have advised the affected PPRuNe users but I never had that confirmed. They certainly advised the affected Mod. I don't know the outcomes but assume loss of employment may have occurred.

The action did not directly involve D&G Forums but did involve some Australians.

[Kharon]

Heigh Ho – I had a frisson of escape there, for a while to enjoy an academic piece, it was fun ( http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif CP). Then back to the grim reality of the world we live in. I enjoy both so no complaints or disagreement with the pragmatists.

T28 - Reasoned people stand toe to toe and debate out their issues, Defo is only for those who simply lack the intestinal fortitude to confront their demons and work the problem out. WiW - Oh well, I suppose if we all got a dollar every time laws were used for purposes other than what was intended, we'd be too rich to hang around here. TW - In the instances I am aware of involving PPRuNe I don't think there was ever any intention of defamation action.Oh what a tangled web we weave,
When first we practise to deceive!
Sir Walter Scott, Marmion, Canto vi. Stanza 17.
Whip up them horses Minnie - back to the salt mines. :D

[Fantome]

Could be all rubbish, But always happy to head good advice.


doth he mean 'head'? or doth he mean 'heed'? (p'raps he dreameth of more of the former)

arrgh and begorrah . . . . . . what hast the old coot been on this time?

(for all dat .. . . and all dat . .. . . . . damn spot on vital topic cap'n.)

[Super Cecil]

Some honest answers
Blood Sucking Lawyers - The Law Firm (http://www.bloodsuckinglawyers.info/)

[haughtney1]

haughtney1. What you suggest may be possible, but rather improbable. You could access PPRuNe via a free Proxy Server in another country - e.g. Hide my Ass or one of hundreds of others in different countries - but I don't know how secure they are considering they also probably record your home IP address.

Hey tailwheel, not to labour a point, but as it was explained to me...you need to go to the effort of accessing the VPN via a public wifi access point eg a public hotspot etc rather than using your own ISP.
Even then that public access point does record some details of your mobile device, but it's a relatively easy process to think ahead and cloak or disguise it.
With respect to email address, well again it is a simple process to create numerous identities all accessed in the process I spoke about earlier.
Ultimately it's a lot of effort to go to so that you can post or blog information that the powers that be, lawyers, or private individuals don't want out in the public domain and please don't think I'm advocating this behaviour, I am merely providing the information that was given to me.
The individual who provided me with this "how to guide" could be described as someone who does advocate the free flow of ideas and opinions online, so far I'm pretty certain he hasn't had any issues:}

[Kharon]

Have mate who is into the serious end of the security and protection gig. His wise words to me were fairly simple "the best system only buys the best time". What he was saying is that the best of the best only buys time before the inevitable. So it must apply to the "net". I think if "they" wanted to "get in", they could, just a matter of resources, time and money, i.e. the game must be worth the candle.

The other issue is that of "style", not just in the way a thing is constructed or even in the phrasing. Some folk can be 'picked' at about 10 words, perhaps not the actual identity but certainly the last name traded under. For example:-

Brutus: And since the quarrel
Will bear no color for the thing he is,
Fashion it thus: that what he is, augmented,
Would run to these and these extremities;
And therefore think him as a serpent's egg,
Which, hatch'd, would as his kind grow mischievous,
And kill him in the shell.
JC act 2, scene1.

Who else could it be?. :D

[Anthill]

Is it still libel if you don't name a particular person by his/her true name but
instead one uses a nickname that alludes to a particular person but doesn't
directly name them?


The answer is yes. If they are by any means identified then you may have well spelt out their name.

Many years ago, a writer published a story about a "John Smith" who was described in words that would cause offence.

A random John Smith stepped forward and claimed that the story impugned his good character and successfully sued for defamation. The story was not about this particular John Smith yet won his legal action and he collected damages.

Some years ago, an entire Year 12 at a Sydney high school took out a successful class action against a teacher and a newspaper who stated in print that they were a "bunch of hopeless losers" or words to that effect.

Beware even if you use somebody's initials! For example: If I said AZ from Burning Airlines was a #$%^& who *&^%$# gerbils and once did $%^&* with a melon and an Altar Boy, I could find myself in deep %^&* ! :E

[Kharon]

AH- Beware even if you use somebody's initials! For example: If I said AZ from Burning Airlines was a #$%^& who *&^%$# gerbils and once did $%^&* with a melon and an Altar Boy, I could find myself in deep %^&* ! Just read an email with a series of hilarious “Larry Pickering” cartoons which were not at all flattering to several government ministers. There have been several recent articles which were damming of the same. Almost every (serious) editorial names and, sometimes shames 'public' officers, the department and even describes why this is so.

Perhaps it's just that pollies are so immune to the opinions of the public, it just doesn't penetrate through the thick, outer layer of hide. Then again, perhaps as in GD s' philosophy, the trough music simply deafens them to the cries of outrage, poverty, sickness and frustration. ????.

[LHLisa]

So I guess this means I am going to hell!

On the bright side a lot of good people are potentially coming with me and hopefully there will be a bar. Seriously people with a point of view which is different to the powers that be should not be intimidated to express their views politely. The nazi s wanted to shut up everyone who disagreed with them also. Some organisations may employ full time staff to monitor what is said on social media. However "engagement" is encouraged. No one should ever be afraid to express an opinion.

I have no legal background. Please send legal aid if required!

[Worrals in the wilds]

Okay, everyone woken up sober this morning? ;) [edit: including Tailwheel, but the look of it, this page just got a lot shorter... :E]

Seriously people with a point of view which is different to the powers that be should not be intimidated to express their views politely.Agreed :ok:. I guess the important thing is that when expressing an opinion, it's important to make sure it's not defamatory and can be backed up with facts if necessary. Golden rule; Never publish anything on the internet that you wouldn't be prepared to defend in court.

I assume that stuff like "IMO this is a rotten decision by XYZ airlines because pax don't want to fly to LHR via Laos" is okay if you have reason to believe this is correct, whereas something like "Everyone knows the CEO of XYZ airlines is a goat:mad:er and a pervert" is probably a little borderline unless you have very good photographic evidence that this is so. :ooh:

[LHLisa]

And I guess the possibly would always exist that a airline employees wife or errant teenage child logged onto their computer while they were out in the garden and typed away to their hearts content, unbeknownst to the employee. I am imagining that could maybe provide a reason of doubt. Defamation is extremely difficult to prove. Not that I think we should defame anyone, of course.

[Tidbinbilla]

Yes, it's all well and good "being in the right" and "having evidence to back it up", but the question you have to ask yourself is "do I have a spare xx thousand dollars to argue the matter in court?"

Inevitably, the aggrieved person is usually a publicly known figure (read: cashed up) and most likely has a little more cash than you lying around. They almost always have pretty sharp litigation lawyers on hand to deal with such matters.

The difficulty (or otherwise) of proving defamation is not relevant. The potential cost of venting your spleen in the public domain IS. :eek:

[Frank Arouet]

Of course this all falls apart when the antagonist doesn't have anything left to loose, perhaps because he/she, has lost it all to the aggrieved. The whole thing then reverts to "Sods Law" of which I have written some papers and amendments.

A question: (Something I have no intent to act on). If somebody has details of your identity that was obtained via any source that can be proved, and that person then makes defamatory comment to your PPRune identity, is that a basis for action against them?

[thorn bird]

Now Frank...your not planning on taking someones house,kicking their dog and screwing their wife perchance??? or vice versa, depending what the wife looks like!!

[Anthill]

Lisa, the computer is seized as evidence and the time/date establishes who was home at the time? Is the computer password protected? There are lots of ways that forensic IT can show who was on the keyboard at the time.

Even gossip can bring you unstuck in defamation matters- spead a rumour about someones sex life, professional competance or moral standing and you could be gone big time.

Damages awarded against you could be as high as $250k with costs of $100k+ for each side. Do you have $500k to throw away by saying that some body is, say, soliciting prostitutes on overnights?

If you say some thing, the onus is on the utterer to prove truth of the utterance. There is no burden on the defamed to prove their innocence.

[Kharon]

AH - Even gossip can bring you unstuck in defamation matters- spead a rumour about someones sex life, professional competence or moral standing and you could be gone big time. Me -The following links are recommended; great for reading over quiet coffee or ale.
Qualified privilege (ttp://www.lawhandbook.sa.gov.au/ch14s05s05.php)

This is what started a heated debate (Baroom Barristers Association) . Creampuff supplied the pertinent clues, it is worth a read.
It's a favourite wriggle hole for likes of 'Officials' who use their assumed legal power, contrary to all other things prescribed; with full knowledge that 'they' won't be touched. (gutless). They can be of course; but it's about half a decade and a new house to get the thing up in a court. By then of course - see TPB above.

[Frank Arouet]

Q. What's the difference between an attorney and a pit bull?
A. Jewelry.

[Worrals in the wilds]

Careful you don't get sued by the Pit Bull Association! They're probably pretty upset about your inference...:\:}
National American Pit Bull Terrier Association (http://www.napbta.com/)

[LHLisa]

I don't think anyone exercising a modicum of self restraint here should be worried. Free speech is an accepted given. Unless we get a bit too carried away after the 3rd or 5th vino. In which case the edit button used surepticiosly the next day could be a good option. Fear and complacency are the enemy, not the collective power of people who care about right and wrong. And we do have power, even if sometimes it feels like we don't.

We do not live under a Stalin or nazi regime. And we are not living in north Korea . With common sense express what you want to say. If people living in Tunisia, Egypt and Syria can have the courage of their convictions then surely we can as well. Remember "Time" magazine person of the year is us.

[Anthill]

Lofty sentiment LHLisa vis-a-vis Stalin and North Korea, this is the Act:

http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/Bills/51PDF/2005/DefamationB05Exp.pdf

read for yourself.

Some examples of The Act in action:

Paper to make record payout to defamed cop - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-04-17/hobart-mercury-to-make-record-defamation-payout/3956314)

School principal wins $80k defamation payout - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-11-06/school-principal-wins-80k-defamation-payout/1132156)

Footy Show defamation payout to Western Bulldogs director Susan Alberti | Sam Newman (http://www.watoday.com.au/national/bulldogs-director-wins-footy-show-payout-20091116-ihar.html)

Publishers aghast at payout in Cleary case (http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/publishers-aghast-at-payout-in-cleary-case-20100324-qucr.html)

By all means, express what you want tempered by common sense. However, this does not give people a licence to impune a persons reputation.

If you say some thing that lowers a persons' standing, then you have no right to say it unless you can prove it to be true. This is why we have laws and a system that includes the concept of torts.

[LHLisa]

Many capitalism based companies and governments reap great advantage from laws which work to stifle free speech and small groups interested in having a voice. For example in Melbourne a group formed to Save our Bay some years ago. They were concerned with the environmental and health impacts of dredging up 150 years worth of toxic heavy metals from the mouth of the yarra and placing them in an open bund 6kms of Mordiallic beach, among other issues. Captain of the road transport industry Lindsay Fox even said it was a waste of government money, stating the dredging was pointless in addressing melbournes sea and road transport issues, and a port in Hastings was a better solution.

The community group was legally threatened with having to pay the legal costs p
Of both parties if they lost. This worked quite well to shut them up , and sensor their right to free speech.

A few years on iconic Portsea bay beach does not have a beach anymore , as a result of dredging . Eating bay caught fish could be considered an extreme sport- do I want dioxin in my mussels or fresh flathead. And the big corporation got what they wanted.

I think the wide spread corporate bullying going on, supported by laws enabled by both sides of parliament , is part of the reason a record 1,700,000 Australians voted for the greens at last election. The greens genuinely do support free speech - not slander - there is a difference .

[Fantome]

The difficulty (or otherwise) of proving defamation is not relevant. The potential cost of venting your spleen in the public domain IS.

__________________

The late Justice Frederick ('Funnelweb') Myers of the Supreme Court of NSW was wont to muse that '"Most litigants aren't in my court looking for justice. They're there to get even."



Do you have $500k to throw away by saying that some body is, say, soliciting prostitutes on overnights?





Captain Adolphous Hippolyte Spriggs, employed by a certain Australian international airline, a man with multiple shady connections,
a self-confessed pimp, userer and person of dike-rat propensities, had on his 'books' so many professionals in so many cities, he'd boast that were the whole of the Foreign Legion queued up, they'd just have to wait their turn.

[Worrals in the wilds]

Free speech is an accepted given.No it isn't. There isn't a shred of legislation, bill of rights or constitutional guarantee to free speech in Australia. Even if it were mentioned in an Act (as the Crimes Act 'rights' are) that Act could be rescinded by Parliament. If it were added to the Constitution it could only be taken out by referendum, but the Australian people voted against that in the 1988 referendum.

UN conventions are not legally binding and the worst thing the UN can do to a country that ignores them is throw them out of the UN.
Nor is posting on the internet speaking, it's legally publishing.

UTS: Internet and online services - Communications Law Centre (http://www.law.uts.edu.au/comslaw/factsheets/internet-and-online-services.html)
Have a read.

[Quokka]

And I guess the possibly would always exist that a airline employees wife or errant teenage child logged onto their computer while they were out in the garden and typed away to their hearts content, unbeknownst to the employee.

Some years ago at the end of some work in the back office and after a quick perusal of PPRuNe, I got up and walked out the door of the room (open room shared by a few) to the toilet with PPRuNe still logged on in one of the browser's tabs. My mistake. It was only a minute and I was back in the room to find a colleague from my team sitting at the terminal that I had been using and typing rapidly on the keyboard. Upon seeing me enter the room he appeared somewhat nervous and uncomfortable, stood-up and walked out of the room. When I sat down, the terminal was still logged into my work account on the system and not his account. The Internet browser was closed.

When I next attempted to log onto PPRuNe at home, I discovered that I'd been given a couple of weeks holiday by the Mods at the end of which, I had to reaffirm my compliance with PPRuNe's Terms & Conditions before being released from PPRuNe purgatory.

To this day I have absolutely no idea what that Air Traffic Controller posted in my name on PPRuNe and I chose not to pursue it further as I perused the lucrative overseas contract I held in one hand that night over a glass of wine with my resignation only days away.

I would, however, like to thank the Mods for moving quickly to remove the post and to protect all concerned from any damage.

To everyone else on PPRuNe, I would give the bleedingly obvious caution... don't access PPRuNe at work.

Some of your professional colleagues are not as professional as you might expect and never assume that they were all inculcated with the same values, norms and mores of behaviour that you were brought up with in your family.

A lesson in life... and people.

[gobbledock]

LHLisa, welcome to a democratic society! The same is happening in the port of Gladstone. Dredging and environmental raping sanctioned and allowed by government with consequences starting to appear 12 or so months into the projects. Fish are dying, ****e is being stirred up from the bottom of the ocean bed, fishermen are being put out of business and the sociological divide in Gladstone is increasing. Why? So China can fuel it's hunger for energy and feed it's needs from Australian resources and the government can profit as well as big business.

I can't wait to see Gladstone in 20 years time. No doubt we will be remembering the 'gateway to the Great Barrier Reef' and reading book about how pristine it once was before the city was turned into The Murray River.
The best politician is one in a pine box. Fu:mad:kers.

[LHLisa]

What is happening in Gladstone is terrible, I am from North Queensland, and I am horrified by what is being done to our great barrier reef. I wonder if that is part of why QLD Labor did loose the last election, total lack of respect and safeguard for our world heritage site.

There have been moves to have a Human rights charter officially recognised within Australia, as currently we don't have one everywhere. Shocking really.

So gobbledock is right unfortunately. I think of it as a given right, when its really an assumed right.

Politicians can be awful. But we do need to engage in the process unfortunately to try to change it. At the risk of offending everyone again I do think the greens policies are the most progressive as far as offering protections to people versus protections to big business.

In American corporations are people . Yes, corporations are considered people and have additional rights because of that. Sadly they seem to have all the rights of people, but none of the responsibilities of people. That is not the direction we want Australia to take .

[T28D]

Lisa in Autralia a Corporation is the same as a natural person, rights and responsibilities are very close to the U.S. Companies Law enshrined here in the Corporations Law.

[Kharon]

Sydney airport debate - Ben Sandilands. (http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2012/04/23/sydney-airport-air-safety-debates-stalled-by-canberra-crisis/)

PT extract - Earlier today I read some disturbing documents relating to the administration of air safety in this country that I wouldn’t touch with a barge pole unless they were subject to the legal privilege of being tabled in parliament, or admitted in court during litigation.

Clever fellah, honed survival instinct - even the press has limits, good read anyway. Watch this space though, it could get interesting, then again - maybe not, as the spectre of libel raises it's ugly head, again.

[LHLisa]

Can I just mention here what everyone here probably already knows.

Calling someone "mean" names hurts. And slamming someone because their views are different to your own isn't great either. And maybe I myself have even been guilty of this, but I hope not.

On the seniority thread in the cabin crew section (which I started maybe naively thinking I could change things for the better) I have been slammed - not in the way I want to be though. Anyway, it hurt. I cried, weak hey.

I guess what I am trying to say is lets all encourage discussion on the issues that matter to us, but let's also try to remember our shared humanity, and the vulnerabilities that brings with it.

Bullying is not nice
This post probably seems off point to this thread but I think it relates to libel.

And I liked having a job. Now I have realised all my posts here are equal to publishing I think I may not have a job. Some will be glad to see me go.

[LHLisa]

It could be a little worrying how self regulated some airlines are.I am new to posting on social media, and this thread has been very informative.

Can I also say that when I started posting here a couple of months ago I felt upset by what felt like sexists remarks here.

But hey, if I'm controversial enough to post on a male dominated forum I probably need to toughen up.

Initially a couple of posts by gobble dock upset me, but now I think I might be his biggest fan ( if he is a he? ) . The same can be said for a few other posters comments towards me. Shaken, then stirred, now a fan.

But the possibly slightly sexists comments have been flattering and fine compared to the nastiest directed at me on the cabin crew section. I suspect I may be banned for life for posting this . From the pilots section as well as the existing cabin crew thread ban. I will miss the banter . Hooray for free speech, but say no to bullying.

[Worrals in the wilds]

I haven't read the seniority thread, but I take it that like so many F/A threads in the past, it turned into a slanging match. :ouch: That's one of the reasons I don't usually read them.

Of course many F/A posters are great, thoughtful and witty writers (particularly the Jetblast mod Juud, who is also female) and it's a minority that give the group a bad name. So much so that for a while F/A issues weren't allowed to be discussed in DG&P; has that changed again or was this thread in the CC forum?

Getting handbagged by a crazed flight attendant poster is part of the PPRuNe experience. I got slammed for something and to this day I still don't know what I said that was so insulting. :confused: I edited the post to fix the grammar and then apparently it wasn't insulting anymore. :confused::confused:

Now I have realised all my posts here are equal to publishing I think I may not have a job.The bottom line; if you choose to bag out your current employer online or in real life and they find out; don't expect them to be sympathetic. It's a risk you take. If you were a current or former Commonwealth public servant you would also take the risk of imprisonment (Crimes Act s70), which is why so few take part in these sort of discussions. Always assume that what you put on here might end up in a book with your name on it and you can't go wrong.

By the way, you're not the only female PPRuNer by a long shot. ;) There are also several female regulars who prefer not to make their gender known on the forum, which is fair enough.
http://www.bigglesbooks.com/images/worrals/wilds.JPG
With hindsight, Worrals Carries On might have been a better title to use. :} I only joined to take part in one particular discussion...:\

[Sarcs]

LHLisa perhaps this site might help you in regards to the bullying, go to this...Chris Richardson psychologist, Forensic Reports, Family Law Court and Social Reports, Criminal Compensation and Presentence Reports, Cairns, Brisbane, Townsville and cape York (http://www.chrisrichardson.com.au/) and then open up the E-Books & Blogs tab, then click on the "times good and bad blog"....whala!
....and guess what it is from a female professional!

[gobbledock]

I have been slammed - not in the way I want to be though.
Yes indeed I am certainly becoming a greater fan by the day. Does it matter if I am male or female?
But you have a way to go before you are my Number 1 pruner. I still have a soft spot for Qantas number 1 footstool and serial plane spotter Ken Borough, and where would we be without CASA's very own Flyingfiend who coincidently has gone rather quiet since being 'outed' (and I aint talking about his sexuality!

[LHLisa]

I read recently that sometimes, in some situations, having no power at all can in fact be a very powerful thing.

The example given was very extreme, so I apologise if it offends anyone. But it went something like this:

A bad person takes a hostage , and holds a knife to the hostages throat. The bad person says "Do what I want, otherwise I will do something very bad to you that you don't like". In this situation the bad person has all the power. And it appears that the hostage has no power.

However, the hostage does have a way of taking back their power. If the hostage says to the bad person "Go ahead and do something bad to me, I don't mind/care whatever (trying not to inflame the probably unstable person weilding their power)", then suddenly the hostage is potentially the most powerful person in the room, situation, company etc etc.

This may seem obvious to many people here, but when I read it recently I found it really interesting. obviously it is a pretty bad example to be using on an aviation forum.... but anyway.

Another interesting way of looking at it was (well interesting to me anyway? ) was "Beware of ugly people, they have nothing to loose."

[porch monkey]

Sorry, my curiosity has got the better of me., Lisa, what way would you like to be slammed?:E

[Hydromet]

Only slightly drifting, but until the law was changed a few years ago, you could be liable for damages under common law, for claiming that someone else's land was flood prone, even if you could demonstrate the truth of the statement. Back in the early '70s the organisation I worked for produced a whole series of flood maps for many towns in the state. It was then realised that we could use these internally, but not issue them as we could be sued.

[Kharon]

In light of the 'new' Pprune privacy policy.

[Frank Arouet]

Go ahead and do something bad to me, I don't mind/care

Isn't suicide illegal?

Crikey, some are fick!