Pedant. noun
1.      a person who makes an excessive or inappropriate display of
learning.
2.      a person who overemphasizes rules or minor details.
3.      a person who adheres rigidly to book knowledge without regard to
common sense.

On Mar 2, 9:02 pm, Michael <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Mar 2009 20:47:43 Berend de Boer wrote:
>
> > >>>>> "Michael" == Michael  <[email protected]> writes:
>
> >     Michael> The vast majority of people in the web development industry
> >     Michael> are complicit in this problem by taking on jobs where they
> >     Michael> KNOW the customer is going to LOSE MONEY.
>
> > That is utter nonsense, and libellous statement. I know of no such
> > company or contractor in this industry.
>
> Definition of libel according to the legal dictionary at law.com
>
> libel
> 1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through
> radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to
> that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into
> ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others. Libel is the written or
> broadcast form of defamation, distinguished from slander, which is oral
> defamation. It is a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity (like a
> newspaper, magazine or political organization) open to a lawsuit for damages
> by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a 
> lie.http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?selected=1153&bold=libel||
>
> And while I am there, here is the definition of "fair comment"
>
> fair comment
> n. a statement of opinion (no matter how ludicrous) based on facts which are
> correctly stated and which does not allege dishonorable motives on the part
> of the target of the comment. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that to
> protect free speech, statements made about a public person (politician,
> officeholder, movie star, author, etc.), even though untrue and harmful, are
> fair comment unless the victim can prove the opinions were stated
> maliciously-with hate, dislike, intent and/or desire to harm. Thus, a public
> figure may not sue for defamation based on published opinions or alleged
> information which would be the basis of a lawsuit if said or published about
> a private person not worthy of opinion or comment. This is a crucial defense
> against libel suits put up by members of the media.
> See also: defamation libel public figure slander
>
> No company or person was named. So your claim that my comment is "libel" is
> rediculous and laughable.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
NZ PHP Users Group: http://groups.google.com/group/nzphpug
To post, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe, send email to
[email protected]
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to