At 2:38 AM 3/8/96, Bill Frantz wrote:

At 6:59 PM 3/7/96 -0800, Timothy C. May wrote:

...

If SurfWatch can be sued for a "bad review," then Siskel and Ebert had better find a new line of work.

As long as a reviewer corrects errors, as SurfWatch seems to be willing to do, I think they are relativly suit-proof. If they don't, well - anyone can be sued for anything. I'll let the lawyers comment on the possibility of success.

OK, OK, I did not stick enough qualifiers in my "If SurfWatch can be sued" point. I should have said, in gory detail, "If SurfWatch can be successfully sued and found liable," etc. It is true that "anyone can be sued for anything" in these BS. I can sue Bill for writing the post he wrote. However, such a suit would definitely never reach trial. My point was that "opinions" (such as movie reviews) are not "tortable" (don't know the legal name), unless specific inaccuracies can be demonstrated, and even then it is hard. Siskel and Ebert have undoubtedly destroyed the box office prospects of many a movie with their "thumbs down" diss of death, but I know of no successful (or even adjudicated) lawsuits on this basis. One of the few cases of a reviewer being successfully sued involved the Bose Corporation, maker of the once-trendy Bose 901 speakers. It seems that around 1970 or so, at the height of popularity of the 901s, one of the stereo mags, or maybe it was "Consumer Reports," ran a review of the 901s and (correctly) criticized them as being not worth the high price (and maybe a comment that Bose's "direct-reflecting" snake oil was just that). Bose sued, and the case dragged on for many years. I think Bose eventually won. Too bad. Opinions are opinions, and a free society has no business suppressing opinions by use of torts. (Another related area is the use of torts to halt public comment on controversial development plans. These are called "SLAPP" suits--"Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation." For example, where AT&T sues "the Cypherpunks" to shut them up about their anti-Clipper feelings. Some judges are awarding large damages to the groups hit with the SLAPP suits.) So, while it is technically true that "anyone can sue anyone else," having the case get to trial is a different thing. And the law actually means what it says, in some cases. The First Amendment, for example, will stop Bill from successfully suing me because he dislikes my use of the word "tortable." If he files some number of these frivolous suits, he may find himself on a list of "vexatious litigants" (one of my favorite phrases of all time!). --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."