| |
|
21. november 2006
|
|
Eugene Volokh reports another victory for free speech online:
The California Supreme Court just held, in Barrett v. Rosenthal, that Internet users who post (to Web sites or discussion groups) material created by others are immune from liability. [...]
A long line of cases had already held that when a user posts material on a site, the operator of the site (or of the computer), can't be held liable, even when it's notified of the potentially tortious nature of the activity. Thus, for instance, we wouldn't be liable for libels posted in our comments. But this case, as well as Batzel and some others, apply this principle even to immunize those who actively repost material, rather than just serve as passive conduits for what others post. This means that if a commenter posts excerpts from others' work, even the commentator himself would be categorically immune from liability for the contents of those excerpts, at least unless he's "active[ly] involve[d] in the creation of [the] posting," or unless he's conspiring with the original author.
This is very welcome for bloggers and everyone else who participates in online discussions.
I am somewhat dismayed to learn this was a case between a medical doctor and an altie, with the doctor suing for libel.
The case involved a lawsuit against Ilena Rosenthal, a women's health activist, who created an e-mail list and a newsgroup (alt.support.breast-implant) to discuss issues related to breast implants. Six years ago, she posted a letter written by a man who was highly critical of the efforts of a doctor to discredit advocates of alternative health treatments.
In the letter, the doctor, Terry Polevoy, was accused of trying to get an alternative medicine radio program canceled by using "scare tactics, stalking, and intimidation techniques" against the program's producer. Polevy, who maintained a website himself to expose what he called "health fraud and quackery" sued Rosenthal for libel.
The good doctor learned that the antidote to being flamed online is to flame back, not to drag it into court.
4:18:17 PM 
|
|
Pierre Gemayel, a maronite Christian leader and Industry Minister in Lebanon, has been shot dead in Beirut, Lebanon today.
Mr Gemayel, a leading anti-Syrian politician, was reportedly shot in the street in a Christian suburb and rushed to hospital, where he died.
His death comes amid a political crisis in Lebanon, following the resignation of six pro-Syrian cabinet members.
Mr Gemayel was a member of the Phalange Party and the son of former President Gemayel Amin.
Gunmen opened fire on Mr Gemayel's convoy as it travelled through Sin el-Fil neighbourhood, Reuters news agency quoted security sources as saying.
A lot of fingers are pointing towards Syria, for every good reason.
Update: Hot Air has a lot of updates, links and reactions.
4:01:27 PM
|
|
 As drivers know only too well, it's a jungle of traffic signs, regulations and rules to keep traffic safe. Now a group of traffic-anarchists argue that traffic will be safer if towns do away with traffic signs. Forcing drivers to think, to pay attention to their surroundings instead of rules and signs, and actually educating everybody to be considerate of other people, will make road traffic safer, they say. Sounds like a crazy idea, sure, but a number of towns across Europe are testing out the experiment in the real world.
The utopia has already become a reality in Makkinga, in the Dutch province of Western Frisia. A sign by the entrance to the small town (population 1,000) reads "Verkeersbordvrij" -- "free of traffic signs." Cars bumble unhurriedly over precision-trimmed granite cobblestones. Stop signs and direction signs are nowhere to be seen. There are neither parking meters nor stopping restrictions. There aren't even any lines painted on the streets.
"The many rules strip us of the most important thing: the ability to be considerate. We're losing our capacity for socially responsible behavior," says Dutch traffic guru Hans Monderman, one of the project's co-founders. "The greater the number of prescriptions, the more people's sense of personal responsibility dwindles."
Monderman could be on to something. Germany has 648 valid traffic symbols. The inner cities are crowded with a colorful thicket of metal signs. Don't park over here, watch out for passing deer over there, make sure you don't skid. The forest of signs is growing ever denser. Some 20 million traffic signs have already been set up all over the country.
Psychologists have long revealed the senselessness of such exaggerated regulation. About 70 percent of traffic signs are ignored by drivers.
The seemingly far fetched idea is not only being tested, it appears to have a dramatic, positive effect, and people are paying attention.
The plans derive inspiration and motivation from a large-scale experiment in the town of Drachten in the Netherlands, which has 45,000 inhabitants. There, cars have already been driving over red natural stone for years. Cyclists dutifully raise their arm when they want to make a turn, and drivers communicate by hand signs, nods and waving.
"More than half of our signs have already been scrapped," says traffic planner Koop Kerkstra. "Only two out of our original 18 traffic light crossings are left, and we've converted them to roundabouts." Now traffic is regulated by only two rules in Drachten: "Yield to the right" and "Get in someone's way and you'll be towed."
Strange as it may seem, the number of accidents has declined dramatically. Experts from Argentina and the United States have visited Drachten. Even London has expressed an interest in this new example of automobile anarchy. And the model is being tested in the British capital's Kensington neighborhood.
Treating people like children has a tendency to make people behave like children, and nowhere are we on a tighter leach than when we're out driving. It will be interesting to see if this works on a larger scale.
It may be, however, that what we see is an example of the Hawthrone effect, a famous (but somewhat controversial) experiment in workplace changes that found that no matter what changes were made, the productivity improved. This has been attributed to the psychological effect of actually paying positive attention to people, which tends to motivate us to do better. It's entirely possible that a move that shows respect for people in traffic motivates them to behave better. I can't help thinking, though, that when people become used to no traffic signs, take the new "anarchy" for granted, that we'll see a reversal of the early positive results.
1:02:30 PM
|
|
In Ramadi, Sunni Arab Iraqis are fighting to retake their city from al-Qaeda.
While the world’s attention has been focused on Baghdad’s slide into sectarian warfare, something remarkable has been happening in Ramadi, a city of 400,000 inhabitants that al-Qaeda and its Iraqi allies have controlled since mid-2004 and would like to make the capital of their cherished Islamic caliphate.
A power struggle has erupted: al-Qaeda’s reign of terror is being challenged. Sheikh Sittar and many of his fellow tribal leaders have cast their lot with the once-reviled US military. They are persuading hundreds of their followers to sign up for the previously defunct Iraqi police. American troops are moving into a city that was, until recently, a virtual no-go area. A battle is raging for the allegiance of Ramadi’s battered and terrified citizens and the outcome could have far-reaching consequences.
Ramadi has been the insurgency’s stronghold for the past two years. It is the conduit for weapons and foreign fighters arriving from Syria and Saudi Arabia. To reclaim it would deal a severe blow to the insurgency throughout the Sunni triangle and counter mounting criticism of the war back in America.
Sheikh Sittar and US commanders believe that the tide is turning in their favour. “Most of the people are now convinced that coalition forces are friends, and that the enemy is al-Qaeda,” the 35-year-old Sheikh claimed in his first face-to-face interview with a Western newspaper.
It appears that the objective of beating Saddam, then beating al-Qaeda, can both be reached. Turning Iraq into a democratic state seems a very tall order, though.
11:15:16 AM
|
|
|
© Copyright 2006 Jan Haugland.
Last update: 01.12.2006; 09:19:53.
|
|
|
