Brett Stewart wins defamation case

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
Loobs said:
Isn’t that related to their algorithm and the way it promotes articles?

Just reposting something here from the DT is the tech equivalent of saying to someone did you read that? The onus is on the person who first puts it out into the world.

As an aside, how often do you think caselaw is cited on 1EE or the kennel..?
Click to expand...
Am no expert but the fact that Google were held liable when they didn't actually post the articles on the Web is quite scary. It seems they were requested to remove the specific search algorithms that linked to the articles but failed to do so in Australia...so I guess it's best like @Dan says not to post full article here. Didn't realise that before today so learned something new! Agree that it's the Mcynts in the media that are truly responsible for the shyt that's printed.

The kennel wouldn't be able to cite any case law but are probably subject to a majority of it..
 
HoldenV8 said:
The fact that Silvertails was even mentioned in the article, to me is proof positive that the media troll fan sites like ours looking for some of their scoops.
Click to expand...

And also why you do need to be VERY careful about what you say.

Journos escape behind the “ it’s alleged “ wording.

I’m involved ( as a witness) in a defamation case where a company is sueing an individual for what that person has been saying about their product on Facebook.

The company has truck loads of proof and it’s very very messy.

The person stands to lose everything, their life savings , house everything, and they are going the jugular as the campaign has cost them 20 million in sales.

All for what’s been said on a Facebook page that the person created and is the sole admin for.

So yes be very careful indeed.
 
If I don't like a product I just won't use it. But I'm not stupid enough to start up a Facebook page about it. That's just inviting being sued.

I have nothing to lose, but I still don't want to lose it.
 
Mark from Brisbane said:
And also why you do need to be VERY careful about what you say.

Journos escape behind the “ it’s alleged “ wording.

I’m involved ( as a witness) in a defamation case where a company is sueing an individual for what that person has been saying about their product on Facebook.

The company has truck loads of proof and it’s very very messy.

The person stands to lose everything, their life savings , house everything, and they are going the jugular as the campaign has cost them 20 million in sales.

All for what’s been said on a Facebook page that the person created and is the sole admin for.

So yes be very careful indeed.
Click to expand...
Gee what about an apology from Greenturd for encouraging these which hunts,and while you are at it Greenturd bring an end to the farce that is the salary cap investigation.
I mean investigating Manly when you have the trial match Rort for the big 2 tosses and the Roosters about to squeeze Cronk in.i mean you couldn’t make some of this stuff up
 
Normie said:
Typical News Corp can’t even get the website right....... lol

Despite the report being taken down from the News Corp website, it was up long enough for the Sea Eagles fan site, www.silvertails.com.au, to upload the story.
Click to expand...
I know what you mean about The quality of NewCorp journalism @Normie but it was actually a Fairfax journo and article that stuffed up our site address
 
Last edited:
So has the Club instigated any action against News? Surely Manly would have a grievance in all of this as well?
 
COMMANDER said:
So has the Club instigated any action against News? Surely Manly would have a grievance in all of this as well?
Click to expand...

You’d only hope, but Toggy has probably put a kybosh on that, can’t have the games partners discredited can we?
 
Batty said:
But weren't they just doing that with Snake too?
They obviously crossed a line with Snake - Im sure the same line was crossed with the Clubs logo....
Click to expand...
I think they cast him as guilty from the outset. If I recall correctly, they published things as fact which were disproven at trial or were never in question, whereas with the salary cap stuff that were saying there is this investigation in x y and z and gave it a tone of guilty without saying it.
 
Batty said:
Im not talking about the Salary Cap stuff - Im talking about the match fixing investigation. Task force Nurlada or whatever it was called.

When the Tele comes up with front pages like 'game of throwns' with our logo plastered all over it - I find that defamatory. That's not reporting facts of an investigation. Its coming up with catchy slogans that imply that Manly threw matches.

Just my opinion anyway.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree, it's just a very thin line and I think to defame it has to be a little more blatant. They have an agenda because anti-Manly gets opposing league fans all moist and will lead to 50 comments on the story from Nat who must be the saddest league fan around.
 
Batty said:
Clubs statements at the time...
"We will continue to support our players 100 per cent and give them the presumption of innocence — particularly against unfair mainstream and social media innuendo."
"It is bitterly disappointed that the club’s hard-earned 70-year reputation for fair play has been unfairly tarnished by imputations raised by some media outlets involving two Sea Eagles matches last season, albeit there is presently no formal investigation.”

When media outlets use front pages with catchy slogans and the Manly logo - thats blatant enough for me - especially since no evidence of anything was found to be true....Damage has been done and the club should be able to seek compensation for that damage.

And - if the catchy front page headline of "Game of Throwns" wasn't an issue - I wonder why its been deleted... (at least I can't find it anyway)
Click to expand...
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...s/news-story/0da7dc25c1f58ea34977f2720bc6cdcd

It's there and was front page too :mad:

images
 
Glad Brett was able to sue from that article
As for the article being posted here and some concerns about silvertails being sued by Brett I would like to think that he wouldn't as I believe we post such articles to comment and show our support for our club and players
But in saying that some lawyers could pursue such claims
 
Fibro Eagle said:
Glad Brett was able to sue from that article
As for the article being posted here and some concerns about silvertails being sued by Brett I would like to think that he wouldn't as I believe we post such articles to comment and show our support for our club and players
But in saying that some lawyers could pursue such claims
Click to expand...
I don't think Brett's point about the DT article being spread on ST per se, was his point.
More that the unsubstantiated article was written and once it was on the Internet, the DT knew that it could be read, copied and spread. :cool:

We probably have the articles from 2009-2011 on here as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 1,052 (members: 29, guests: 1,023)

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
7 6 1 99 14
7 6 1 54 14
7 5 2 36 12
8 5 2 39 11
8 5 3 64 10
7 4 3 49 10
8 4 4 73 8
7 3 4 17 8
8 4 4 -14 8
8 4 4 -16 8
8 4 4 -60 8
8 3 4 17 7
8 3 5 -25 6
7 2 5 -55 6
8 3 5 -55 6
7 1 6 -87 4
7 1 6 -136 4

Online statistics

Members online
29
Guests online
1,023
Total visitors
1,052
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Latest posts

Newest members

Stay Connected

Back
Top Bottom