Aviation Herald Threatened, Ryanair Suspected

[Plainplane 6]

The Aviation Herald has been threatened with legal action by a so-called unknown airline. Speculation however seems to indicate that airline to be none other than Ryanair.

http://www.avherald.com/h?article=45a1cb11

 

For me I find this deeply disturbing. Thoughts?

[Glynn 405]

Hello

Great airline, gets me around Europe very cheaply to places I would not be able to afford to visit using the legacy carriers

[mgh 89]

For me I find this deeply disturbing. Thoughts?

 

Why is this disturbing? If a site publishes defamatory statements it can exect to be asked to remove them, especially if they are unverified ones from readers.

[William J.S.S 173]

Exactly.

Publishing comments by people is one of the fastest ways to get contacted my a lawyer. It serves no purpose.

 

Besides, who checked all those "facts" and statements before publishing?

 

Serves them right...

[eghansen 1]

Ahhh! And thus we have one of the most fundamental differences between the US and the rest of the world, especially Britain. Note that the original posting came from someone from Florida. And the responses came from people outside the US.

 

In the US, we are used to a completely free and unhibited discussion. Because of the First Amendment in the US Constitution, there really is no such thing as "defamation." Companies can sue for libel, but the best they can get would be monetary damages awarded by a jury. It also would require a civil trial which in the US can take several years. In California, it takes about five years for a civil trial to reach a court. In the meantime, there is no way to force the postings to be removed.

 

In the US, we not have only have postings which may be defamatory, but we have entire websites devoted to trashing companies, individuals, ideas, etc. We have learned to live with it. Many actually like it that way.

 

You can check out www.untied.com. This is a website which has been around for 15 years and posts complaints about United Airlines.

[kannwar 47]

Ahhh! And thus we have one of the most fundamental differences between the US and the rest of the world, especially Britain. Note that the original posting came from someone from Florida. And the responses came from people outside the US.

 

In the US, we are used to a completely free and unhibited discussion. Because of the First Amendment in the US Constitution, there really is no such thing as "defamation." Companies can sue for libel, but the best they can get would be monetary damages awarded by a jury. It also would require a civil trial which in the US can take several years. In California, it takes about five years for a civil trial to reach a court. In the meantime, there is no way to force the postings to be removed.

 

In the US, we not have only have postings which may be defamatory, but we have entire websites devoted to trashing companies, individuals, ideas, etc. We have learned to live with it. Many actually like it that way.

 

You can check out www.untied.com. This is a website which has been around for 15 years and posts complaints about United Airlines.

 

And it's exactly this uninhibited discussion that allows all thinking individuals to trash Justine Bieber. Long may it continue =).

[747-fan 19]

Actually I've got the distinct impression that money always wins conflicts like these. A tiny website will be forced to "chicken out" since an airline can sue and appeal and appeal again until the tiny website's broke from all the legal fees and lawyer salaries.

 

It's in fact a horrendous bloated legal system that stifles true freedom of speech/expression. But much better that than totalitarian systems and such.

 

It kind of reminds me of that case some years ago when Avsim stood up against that guy who tried to patent FS addon liveries, what was he called again? Anyway, that made me proud to be an Avsim member. Tom et al. won't bend to stuff like that.

[tttocs 301]

I have to laugh at the text of the "notice". "...damaged in the eyes of right-thinking members of society"? Oh, man! That one had milk snorting out of both nostrils, as they say.

 

Leaving aside the differences between the US and UK legal systems, from a PR point of view, some companies still just don't "get" the whole publicity in the internet age thing. You start demanding removal of internet postings, and suddenly a much larger audience takes notice and far more credence is given to whatever it was the company demanded be removed. It's classic "Streisand effect" stuff.

 

Scott

[Matthew Kane 1,343]

In the US, we not have only have postings which may be defamatory, but we have entire websites devoted to trashing companies, individuals, ideas, etc. We have learned to live with it. Many actually like it that way.

 

You can check out www.untied.com. This is a website which has been around for 15 years and posts complaints about United Airlines.

 

Ahem.....You are not talking about the USA. Canada also have freedoms, and in many cases more freedoms then in the USA..

 

That website you just posted. www.untied.com was actually started by a Canadian University Professer Jeremy Cooperstock, from Mcgill University in Montreal, when he was faced with poor customer service from United, he is considered the first to create an internet complaint site when he was attending the University of Toronto back in 1997.

 

Listen to this for a moment:

http://www.cbc.ca/pl.../ID/2311623427/

 

He has recently been given notice by United Lawyers for the layout of that website. So this battle is being fought over US boarders and has been going on since 1997 but has mostly just amounted to threats from United Lawyers.

 

 

And of course everyone's favourite....United Breaks Guitars.

 

So it seams the Canadians are on the forefront of this battle and not the Americans and the Canadians are more creative about it. B)

 

Therefore the case of United vs Untied.com is actually a USA corporation vs a Canadian University Professor trying to make a difference. He is currently trying to raise a defence fund.

 

Cheers

[Airbus Commander 563]

I have always always found the reporting on the AV Herald to be of extreemly high quality and have the utmost respect for Simon. I think there's something very worrying when an airlines asks for comments about it's safety to be removed. I had viewed said comments yesterday from the original article I think this letter is referrign to and none seemed to be untrue from what I can judge. I personally have very little time for said airline, in particular its boss, as I have made aware a number of times. I've personally just donated to the AV Herald to help Simon with his legal fees and do hope that this goes to court to expose to the public the goings on inside such an airline.

 

Also, do keep in mind thought that;

1. Said airline has not been officially confirmed as the airline in question, and I'd take care not to post anything about their identity while many of course know who we're talking about.

2. If you don't have the facts to hand, don't make them up, just say "In my opinion", or "I've heard", stating something as fact when it's not, though it is something the boss of possible airline likes to do, is illegal.

 

Regards,

Ró.

[mgh 89]

I have always always found the reporting on the AV Herald to be of extreemly high quality

 

The Herald's reporting is not in question. It's "...comments posted by our readers ..."

[Swofford 155]

Send this over to popehat.com.

[Airbus Commander 563]

The Herald's reporting is not in question. It's "...comments posted by our readers ..."

I didn't mean to imply it wasn't, I meant that I think it is of a high quality...

 

I have always always found the reporting on the AV Herald to be of extreemly high quality and have the utmost respect for Simon. I think there's something very worrying when an airlines asks for comments about it's safety to be removed.

[mgh 89]

The airline is not asking for Aviation's Herald's own comments to be removed. It's expecting Aviation Herald to take responsibility for comments posted by its readers.

 

We all know the sort of nonsensical rubbish that gets posted. On these forums AVSIM will remove defamatory or offensive posts and threads.

[Swofford 155]

The airline is not asking for Aviation's Herald's own comments to be removed. It's expecting Aviation Herald to take responsibility for comments posted by its readers.

 

We all know the sort of nonsensical rubbish that gets posted. On these forums AVSIM will remove defamatory or offensive posts and threads.

 

Thank God for Section 230 in the US and sites like Popehat that fight against this type of thinking.