EduGeek, netiquett and legal consequences

[Geoff]

AIUI if you have moderators exercising "editorial control" e.g. routinely reading and sometime removing posts for [whatever reason], you risk liability by failing to spot and remove a defamatory post.

 

Indeed, I suggest you look up the concept of 'common carrier' in your nearest legal lexicon if you wish to know more about this.

[Diello]

Agreed - it's a similar principle to the DMCA 'safe harbour' approach in the US. As soon as you start any sort of moderating, you take on a responsibility to do that job 100% effectively. By doing none, you have plausible deniability.

 

I don't think going round in circles debating the behaviour of said company does any good to be honest. You can take their behaviour as unfriendly, be annoyed about it, decide not to purchase their products based on it - or you can say that they did what they had to do to protect their name - either opinion is valid. If any of you think you'd have behaved in a different way over this to the site management, I think you're kidding yourselves though. What was done was done to protect both the individuals at the top, & this site itself. As someone whose managed online-communities for quite a few years, sometimes you have to take the route of least resistance, loose the battle to win the war.

 

Yes, the exposure EG has now got is both a blessing & a curse. Whilst it allows us many benefits as members, yes, it does curtail our ability to just 'let rip' like we may have been able to do in the early days. As with most things in life, the situations grey, not black & white. Pros & cons.

 

Besides, if anyone thinks being able to post profanity & ranting abuse (whatever the justification) makes for a happy community, then you're deluded I think. And trust me... I love a good rant more than most!!

[djm968]

Agreed - it's a similar principle to the DMCA 'safe harbour' approach in the US. As soon as you start any sort of moderating, you take on a responsibility to do that job 100% effectively. By doing none, you have plausible deniability.

 

Tottaly agree and the only way to moderate a forum site 100% effectively is to have every post submitted go through “editorial control” before appearing on the site.

 

What bothers me it is that you may be opening yourself up for possible libel action by implying that the site is moderated at all and it may be better to be reactive and ignorant because the site will never be 100% proactive given the limited budget and human resources available to it.

 

COMMON CARRIER

 

Transporter who holds himself out to the general public for the transportation of goods over a definite route and according to a regular schedule.

[danIT]

Who decides when i post should be removed, if it is objective and non-bias should it be removed if gives a fair reflection. I dont think anybody who uses this site effecitivly wishes to trash companies publically but wish to make fair statements about good and bad practices.

 

I know of other well known forums who have had to turn moderation on in order to prevent spam etc,

 

Plus i hate censorship, Edugeek had a nice heavenly glow until i recieved that message regarding Etiquett and legal consequences. Have you had the complaints looked at my a solicitor or anyone in the legal profession to actually let you know where you stand?

 

I recently recieved bad workmanship on my car following a full service, i search the net and find multiple posts from all aorund the UK flaming that particular garage are they being taken to court....i think not its an opinion?

 

Edugeek should be proud that companies take such notice of this forum, they obviously think it carries some weight.

 

We'll all be a managed service soon anyway lol

[djm968]

Have you had the complaints looked at my a solicitor or anyone in the legal profession to actually let you know where you stand?

 

Took the words out of my mouth.

 

Anyone know any good solicitors who specialise in this field who would be willing to offer some free advice?

[limbo]

It does not really matter where you stand legally - to win you have to fight, which takes a lot of time and money.

 

The only real option is to apease the relevant parties.

 

And stick to moaning about LEA's instead - they do not have the budget to waste!

[djm968]

That’s fine but what stops company yyyy and company zzzz following the same course of action if another post goes through “editorial control” unnoticed.

 

I am not suggesting mounting a legal challenge, just questioning if “editorial control” should be implied when it can never be 100% effective given the limited resources available to implement it.

[Diello]

This just in: http://www.edugeek.net/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=8918

[russdev]

wow

 

Someone beat me to it yes me and db got emails today I spoke to Graham over the phone this morning..

 

Russ

[PiqueABoo]

It does not really matter where you stand legally

 

Not entirely true.. personally I've seen more empty legals threats than plausible ones. Some people who know they don't have a credible case and don't intend to go anywhere near a court, will simply take advantage of your ignorance... life is a bit of crock in this respect.

 

And stick to moaning about LEA's instead

 

Yeah why not - I mean we spend all day moaning about you lot when we're not passing the time chatting on forums. There's just nothing like a good out-group to blame for all your troubles ;b

 

questioning if “editorial control” should be implied

 

That would be something settled in court. There is obviously a huge amount of irony in this because it encourages you not to moderate i.e. increases the amount of naughty/defamatory crap on forums.

[robert.mabbutt]

Just found this on the reg! This on the register!

(nice sub heading 'school of BOFH'!)

Robert

[indie]

*cough* http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/05/30/sophos_versus_edugeeks/ *ahem*

 

EDIT: damn you beat me to it!

[cookie_monster]

I was just about to post the same.

[_Bat_]

"Obviously the school techies are not taking it lying down, and pencils are being sharpened at a furious rate, I can tell you," he adds.

 

Haha, nice.

[grahamc]

Hmm.. some people are reporting to me that they can access this thread without logging into EduGeek, but not the thread where I posted an apology from Sophos.

 

For their benefit, here's what I posted on EduGeek last Friday:

 

Hi

 

I'm Graham Cluley, head of corporate communications and senior technology consultant at Sophos.

 

I found out yesterday that our company had sent a letter of complaint to EduGeek complaining about some of the postings made up here.

 

Here is what happened: a Sophos employee got very upset about the language used in some of the postings and felt strongly that something should be done. In fact, they felt so strongly, they managed to convince a member in our legal department to write an official letter to the website administrator!

 

I don't need to tell you that this response by Sophos was *entirely* inappropriate, and Sophos would like to apologise to EduGeek staff and its community. We feel we let you down and are frankly embarrassed that such a letter was sent. Forums like yours are a wonderful resource, both for administrators facing complex security and networking issues in the education sector, and for companies like ours, which can help us provide a better service. Sophos has no wish to censor, no matter how unpleasant it is to hear the news, people's points of view.

 

I have spoken and apologised to EduGeek's Russell Dyas this morning who suggested I post a message up on the forum here. It was good to speak to Russell and reassure him that we think that we handled this situation badly - I'd like to thank him for his assistance and understanding. I have also left a message with EduGeek's owner, and hope to speak to him soon.

 

If anyone would like to contact me personally regarding this I can be reached at

 

ukcorpcomms @ sophos.com

 

I look forward to the opportunity to chatting to you.

 

Sincerely

Graham Cluley, Sophos

 

 

I would welcome people to join the Sophos apology thread if they wish to make a comment. Alternatively I can be contacted at the email address given above.

 

Cheers,

Graham Cluley, Sophos

[_Bat_]

Hmm.. some people are reporting to me that they can access this thread without logging into EduGeek, but not the thread where I posted an apology from Sophos.

 

You posted it in the security forum. For obvious reasons that section of the forum is purposely kept away from search engine spiders . Thats the reason why people can't see it without logging in anyway.

[grahamc]

You posted it in the security forum. For obvious reasons that section of the forum is purposely kept away from search engine spiders . Thats the reason why people can't see it without logging in anyway.

 

Aha! Thanks for the explanation Bat.

 

Regards

Graham Cluley, Sophos

[Geoff]

We can have the thread moved here if needed.

 

BTW: I wonder what the reg story did to the site stats/member count?

[grahamc]

We can have the thread moved here if needed.

 

That could be a good idea. As long as there was a placeholder where it used to be, pointing people here..

 

BTW: I wonder what the reg story did to the site stats/member count?

 

Fingers crossed it will increase user numbers on EduGeek. The Register is one of the most widely read IT news sites, so I hope your bandwidth quota can take it.

 

Regards

Graham Cluley, Sophos

[mattcharlton]

We can have the thread moved here if needed.

 

BTW: I wonder what the reg story did to the site stats/member count?

 

29 new members today (no idea how that relates to regular signups) Both me and my techie have signed up due to that reg link though

[mattx]

Arrr, this story on The Register will explain my rather full 'Inbox' this morning..... :!: :!: 8O

[MkII]

Time to cash in Matt - any plans for media stardom??

[mattx]

Time to cash in Matt - any plans for media stardom??

 

And just think, Big Brother started yesterday...... ;-)

[ According to the wife, I don't watch it of course.....]

 

Just been E-mailed the link to the comments.

 

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/05/30/sophos_versus_edugeeks/comments/

[_Bat_]

How many of you on here have commented? I commented in reply to this post:

 

Well, it sounds like you are a model employee who wouldn't dream of abusing your employers time or resources and are therefore fully qualified to criticise. I am sure these HD videos and audio encoding sessions are a central part of your job as a school technician, hmmm.

 

because I thought it was extremely unfair.

[MkII]

All is revealed in Google's cache - ooer!