On 02 Sep 2002 01:33:54 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) wrote:
> David B Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > This probably just means that if they want to go after somebody,
> > they have to go after the person who posted the message and seek
> > damages.
> 
> What possible damages?  In the United States, at least, you are
> allowed to say the truth.  I know that in the UK and some other
> countries truth is not a defense to libel.
> 
> In this case, it isn't even defamatory.  What possible damages?
> 
> Geez.  Spam sucks, but don't let avoiding spam contort every other
> action in your life.

Never said they'd actually be able to pull it off ;) Just saying that,
in the best of circumstances, that's probably their only avenue.

Attachment: pgpwoeSRT79wd.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to