They really do look supreme.. rflmao.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Legal fund for Reviewers/Erin?
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
Yep, is similar in Spain, just for criminal processes… which leave people without proper legal cover with respect to big companies who had a lot of resources.For a criminal case, it is the government who brings the case against you, and if you can't afford an attorney the government will appoint you one. Most are familiar with the 'Miranda Warning' from watching TV, or from having been arrested
In a civil case, none of that applies.
But you must keep on checking to see if it has the same effect as the first time.
They do in Diego Garcia (BIOT [British Indian Ocean Territory])!
As long as no one shakes me to see if the pain increases every time that shaking is done to someone with a hangover. That would constitute scientifically abusive behavior.Yea, that's the science part of it, the pain must be repeatedly demonstrable. LOL
& God help them if they cause one to spill their drink, as that is alcohol abuse!
Last edited:
In Virginia, it’s a Class 3 misdemeanor under “§ 18.2-417. Slander and libel.”
I suspect that’s true in most states, but it’s easy enough to google.
But I think it would have to be profoundly egregious befor a prosecutor would attempt an indictment, because it’s so hard to prove at the criminal standard. And the victim is not made whole when the perp is convicted, so a civil action will be necessary in any case.
Rick “not a lawyer but can read a state code” Denney
“Any person who shall falsely utter and speak, or falsely write and publish, of and concerning any person of chaste character…”
Leaves ME out.
somebodyelse
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2018
- Messages
- 4,402
- Likes
- 3,773
To clarify, criminal cases need proof beyond a reasonable doubt, while civil cases only require the balance of probability.
somebodyelse
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2018
- Messages
- 4,402
- Likes
- 3,773
Joking aside, that relates to some people being libel-proof because the statement couldn't make their reputation any worse than it already was.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #1,692
The above case got the attention of Luis Rossman:
As he says at the end, I too was disappointed that the above youtuber had removed the video that caused the threats from DCS. On positive front, seems like the community is galvanizing around defending smaller players.
Wow this guy is triggered for sure. He wants to pull the trigger and get on with it! Very cool.
DanielT
Master Contributor
Last edited:
Ok, since dCS did apologize I'd say posting about a different DCS is a bit unwarranted.
This video is pretty hard to watch because you've got a guy who is going on a bit of a rant.
OMG, I love this guy !!!.
I was getting a little bored and just about to jump to the end when it hit the 7:00 minute mark, then it really got good.
He tells it like it is, doesn't pull his punches, and goes right for the throat.
Kudos to you sir, what's right is right, and BS will always be BS.
Thanks @amirm for posting this.
It's not about the company name, but about them using the same despicable tactics that have started to become rampant
in an effort to silence honest internet reviewers.
The EU is planning to introduce legislation against such abusive legal tactics: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_BRI(2022)733668 Big oil provides some recent examples of such attempts by companie with deep pockets to silence criticism of their behaviour (irrespective of what you think of the merits of the ecological arguments involved). Whether such SLAPP tactics are feasible depends a lot on the legal system of a particular country. In the Netherlands it does not seem to work, but in the UK it is a quite common and sadly sucessful practice.
Goldensound may be 'honest' but AFAIC he's honestly a prat when he calls a DAC that measures very well 'Dull, really dull". "It sounds like they've tried to make something really refined and hi-fi and gone too far. And as a result it's become smooth, real smooth, too smooth."
what f*ing nonsense.
Arch has a new post about it (nicer than mine):
SUMMER MUSINGS: On the perils of subjective opinions in High-End Audio (dCS v. GoldenSound).
A blog for audiophiles about more objective topics. Measurements of audio gear. Reasonable, realistic, no snakeoil assessment of sound, and equipment.
archimago.blogspot.com
Which isn't to say Goldensound should be *sued* for spouting such subjectivist garble. But I can see why the (since fired) dCS flunky that emailed him legal threats, might have lost his sangfroid, reading that.
Last edited:
If opinions are truly protected because they are not defamatory by definition, then so are bad opinions.
That’s the point, of course.
But a fact can’t be an opinion. “I don’t like how it sounds” is an opinion. “____ is a criminal” is not an opinion but an expression of fact that is either true or not. After saying something like that, one can’t hide behind “that’s just my opinion.”
Rick “the distinction is important” Denney
That’s the point, of course.
But a fact can’t be an opinion. “I don’t like how it sounds” is an opinion. “____ is a criminal” is not an opinion but an expression of fact that is either true or not. After saying something like that, one can’t hide behind “that’s just my opinion.”
Rick “the distinction is important” Denney
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
