I Went to Law School at Google.com, Listen to Me!

If it doesn't go somewhere else, it goes here.

Moderator: Grapevine

Welcome

I Went to Law School at Google.com, Listen to Me!

Post by Welcome » Tue Dec 17, 2013 8:29 am

Guest wrote:
E News wrote: As for he parents in question on this forum, consider the source. They have been at 3 clubs in 3 years. The father was caught recruiting kids away from the Texans. In any other business the customer would no longer be a customer. My DD plays on this team so I have a grasp of what the real story is opposed to you who get your soccer news from the STX Forum and world news from E!
Wes has a history of retaliation against parents that don't follow status quo and it finally caught up with him. What's most alarming is that the Texan BOD is ok with the mistreatment of kids that Wes is hired to oversee and develop. Instead they have a paranoid DOC that lacks the self-confidence and moral reasoning to do what's right when faced with difficult situations. I applaud STYSA BOD for doing what's right within the rules that all clubs are governed to protect the kids that these youth clubs are created to support.
ADMIN, this is an outright lie. Wes has no history anywhere near what this person alleges and cannot write this crap in an open forum. You are liable for what is written here and anything can be subpoenaed.

User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 548
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 6:32 pm
Location: Austin, TX
Contact:

Re: Texans jump on the bandwagon

Post by admin » Tue Dec 17, 2013 9:15 am

Welcome wrote:
ADMIN, this is an outright lie. Wes has no history anywhere near what this person alleges and cannot write this crap in an open forum. You are liable for what is written here and anything can be subpoenaed.
Dear Anonymous Internet Lawyer:

1. You need to read your federal law a little bit better, particularly 47 USC sec. 230. It provides that the owner of a computer service, such as message boards, shall not "be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider." In plain English, the person who makes the post is liable. The person who runs the website is not.

2. If you have some personal interest in this and want to discuss it with me, e-mail me. Take your "outrage" off the forum.

Thanks,
Admin
Thanks for visiting STXSoccer.com

Please review our Terms of Service: www.stxsoccer.com/terms.html

Guest

Re: Texans jump on the bandwagon

Post by Guest » Tue Dec 17, 2013 9:39 am

Welcome wrote:
Guest wrote:
E News wrote: As for he parents in question on this forum, consider the source. They have been at 3 clubs in 3 years. The father was caught recruiting kids away from the Texans. In any other business the customer would no longer be a customer. My DD plays on this team so I have a grasp of what the real story is opposed to you who get your soccer news from the STX Forum and world news from E!
Wes has a history of retaliation against parents that don't follow status quo and it finally caught up with him. What's most alarming is that the Texan BOD is ok with the mistreatment of kids that Wes is hired to oversee and develop. Instead they have a paranoid DOC that lacks the self-confidence and moral reasoning to do what's right when faced with difficult situations. I applaud STYSA BOD for doing what's right within the rules that all clubs are governed to protect the kids that these youth clubs are created to support.
ADMIN, this is an outright lie. Wes has no history anywhere near what this person alleges and cannot write this crap in an open forum. You are liable for what is written here and anything can be subpoenaed.
Then I suggest you make your liable case and watch some of the players/parents come out of the woodwork. Wesley has done this in the past and I am more than confident that he has done it with this kid in question.

Guest

Re: Texans jump on the bandwagon

Post by Guest » Tue Dec 17, 2013 9:41 am

It is clear that anonymous users can be held liable for the things that they post on a forum such as this. Especially those things that are intended to harm another person's reputation. I would say that there are dozens of pages on this forum that fit that exact description. The court has ruled that a forum can be compelled to turn over the names of anonymous posters who are deemed to have posted defamatory statements. There are several court cases in the recent past in this regard. I would also say that the protections provided under Section 230 are being challenged and may not hold up in the near future.

"Law360, New York (November 21, 2013, 1:41 PM ET) -- A who’s who of the nation’s Internet content and service providers warned the Sixth Circuit on Tuesday that upholding a former Cincinnati Bengals cheerleader’s defamation verdict against a gossip website that posted user comments on her sex life would eviscerate a statutory immunity critical to the online universe."
http://www.law360.com/articles/490487/i ... ion-appeal

To those of you anonymous people who take to this forum regularly in order to harm the reputation of people who are simply trying to do their job, you should beware, your anonymity may soon be removed. Are you prepared to publicly state your name and then post the things that you say here?

Guest

Re: Texans jump on the bandwagon

Post by Guest » Tue Dec 17, 2013 9:52 am

quote]
Then I suggest you make your liable case and watch some of the players/parents come out of the woodwork. Wesley has done this in the past and I am more than confident that he has done it with this kid in question.[/quote]

First of all, it libel. Libel is written defamation.

Secondly, statements made that are false and made with the malicious intent of harming another person are libelous. So, unless someone out there can show where a rule was broken on the official record then all of the "players/parents coming out of the woodwork" to tell their undocumented stories would amount to nothing. There are plenty of statements made in this forum that serve no other purpose than defaming coaches/parents/players with the intent of harming their reputation in an attempt to destroy the economic viability of Austin Texans = libel. Those statements are clearly documentable.

Your right to criticize is protected, your right to defame is not.

Guest

Re: Texans jump on the bandwagon

Post by Guest » Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:00 am

Guest wrote:It is clear that anonymous users can be held liable for the things that they post on a forum such as this. Especially those things that are intended to harm another person's reputation. I would say that there are dozens of pages on this forum that fit that exact description. The court has ruled that a forum can be compelled to turn over the names of anonymous posters who are deemed to have posted defamatory statements. There are several court cases in the recent past in this regard. I would also say that the protections provided under Section 230 are being challenged and may not hold up in the near future.

"Law360, New York (November 21, 2013, 1:41 PM ET) -- A who’s who of the nation’s Internet content and service providers warned the Sixth Circuit on Tuesday that upholding a former Cincinnati Bengals cheerleader’s defamation verdict against a gossip website that posted user comments on her sex life would eviscerate a statutory immunity critical to the online universe."
http://www.law360.com/articles/490487/i ... ion-appeal

To those of you anonymous people who take to this forum regularly in order to harm the reputation of people who are simply trying to do their job, you should beware, your anonymity may soon be removed. Are you prepared to publicly state your name and then post the things that you say here?
Yes. Bring it on. Please file a lawsuit and spend your money. You have three months to fill. File away, find out who I am and get to work. When you file the complaint you will identify yourself and most of this will be moot.

Guest

Re: Texans jump on the bandwagon

Post by Guest » Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:07 am

Guest wrote:
Then I suggest you make your liable case and watch some of the players/parents come out of the woodwork. Wesley has done this in the past and I am more than confident that he has done it with this kid in question.
First of all, it libel. Libel is written defamation.

Secondly, statements made that are false and made with the malicious intent of harming another person are libelous. So, unless someone out there can show where a rule was broken on the official record then all of the "players/parents coming out of the woodwork" to tell their undocumented stories would amount to nothing. There are plenty of statements made in this forum that serve no other purpose than defaming coaches/parents/players with the intent of harming their reputation in an attempt to destroy the economic viability of Austin Texans = libel. Those statements are clearly documentable.

Your right to criticize is protected, your right to defame is not.
I'll help you clean up your quotes the best I can.

Seems like the only person that is attempting "to destroy the economic viability of Austin Texans" is Wesley Schevers and their own BoD.

I would buy a seat in the courtroom to watch this defamation/libel case unfold. Good popcorn theater.

Guest

Re: Texans jump on the bandwagon

Post by Guest » Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:55 am

Guest wrote:quote]
Then I suggest you make your liable case and watch some of the players/parents come out of the woodwork. Wesley has done this in the past and I am more than confident that he has done it with this kid in question.
So, unless someone out there can show where a rule was broken on the official record then all of the "players/parents coming out of the woodwork" to tell their undocumented stories would amount to nothing.[/quote]

You do have a point, those undocumented stories would not hold up in court but the mere fact that South Texas Youth Soccer Association has suspended Wes, has now giving those undocumented stories some leverage because this shows he is capable of retaliating. There have been many families through the years in every club that choose not to file grievances because of fear of retaliation (i.e., black balled, problem parent/kid …etc.) and they have been well documented on this site.

Guest

Re: Texans jump on the bandwagon

Post by Guest » Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:08 am

Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:quote]
Then I suggest you make your liable case and watch some of the players/parents come out of the woodwork. Wesley has done this in the past and I am more than confident that he has done it with this kid in question.
So, unless someone out there can show where a rule was broken on the official record then all of the "players/parents coming out of the woodwork" to tell their undocumented stories would amount to nothing.
You do have a point, those undocumented stories would not hold up in court but the mere fact that South Texas Youth Soccer Association has suspended Wes, has now giving those undocumented stories some leverage because this shows he is capable of retaliating. There have been many families through the years in every club that choose not to file grievances because of fear of retaliation (i.e., black balled, problem parent/kid …etc.) and they have been well documented on this site.[/quote]
And you got your law degree from where...Barbados School of Law? You hallway lawyers crack me up every time you threaten litigation on this board. Do the math. Even if you have standing to file in the first place, do you have the $5k to put down on a retainer as starters, or the next 12 months waiting to even get on the docket? And to prove what...that someone else was a jerk? News flash! You can't litigate bad manners.

User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 548
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 6:32 pm
Location: Austin, TX
Contact:

Re: Texans jump on the bandwagon

Post by admin » Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:22 am

Guest wrote: I would also say that the protections provided under Section 230 are being challenged and may not hold up in the near future.

"Law360, New York (November 21, 2013, 1:41 PM ET) -- A who’s who of the nation’s Internet content and service providers warned the Sixth Circuit on Tuesday that upholding a former Cincinnati Bengals cheerleader’s defamation verdict against a gossip website that posted user comments on her sex life would eviscerate a statutory immunity critical to the online universe."
http://www.law360.com/articles/490487/i ... ion-appeal

To those of you anonymous people who take to this forum regularly in order to harm the reputation of people who are simply trying to do their job, you should beware, your anonymity may soon be removed. Are you prepared to publicly state your name and then post the things that you say here?
Guest -

1 - Do not threaten my users.

2 - Google does not make you a lawyer. A single trial court (which has no precedential value) misinterpreting the law does not mean that sec. 230 is at risk. The overwhelming weight of the appellate courts (which bind other courts) interprets sec. 230 by its plain language. BTW, there is a distinct fact in the case you cite that potentially makes sec. 230 inapplicable. But that fact would also suggest that the court would otherwise apply sec. 230 as written.

So if your intent was to scare me, you failed.
Thanks for visiting STXSoccer.com

Please review our Terms of Service: www.stxsoccer.com/terms.html

Locked