Re: [Vo]:Rossi is suing Wikipedia for libel

[Jed Rothwell]

Alan Fletcher  wrote:

That was the Italian wiki.
>

There is an article in English:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_Rossi_(entrepreneur)

It is linked to an Italian one, which is gone, as you say.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Rossi is suing Wikipedia for libel

[Alan Fletcher]

That was the Italian wiki.

Someone X posted an untrue statement (per Rossi, and with no REF to back it up)
Rossi deleted it.
X put it back.

X's account is cancelled
Rossi is ??? blocked ? deleted ?
The article itself seems to have been deleted.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi is suing Wikipedia for libel

[Jed Rothwell]

Mark Gibbs  wrote:

Rossi is infuriating. And his caps lock key is stuck.
>

Yes and Yes!

You don't know the half of it. If you think he is infuriating on the web,
wait until you meet him in person.

Still, he is a sweetie-pie.


Jones Beene  wrote:

My guess is that Wiki will apologize and make the corrections as we speak.
>

May bee. See the famous article featuring Randy from Boise:

The Wikipedia FAQK

http://www.wired.com/software/webservices/commentary/alttext/2006/04/70670

*Is it true that anyone can contribute?*

Sure, Wikipedia is absolutely open to absolutely anyone contributing to
absolutely anything! As long as you haven't been banned, or the article
you're contributing to hasn't been locked, or there isn't a group of people
waiting to delete anything you write, or you don't make the same change
more than three times in one day, or the subject of the article hasn't
decided to send scary lawyer letters to Wikipedia, or you haven't pissed
Jimbo Wales off real bad. It's all about freedom.


Randy makes his entrance!

*But why should I contribute to an article? I'm no expert.*

That's fine. The Wikipedia philosophy can be summed up thusly: "Experts are
scum." For some reason people who spend 40 years learning everything they
can about, say, the Peloponnesian War -- and indeed, advancing the body of
human knowledge -- get all pissy when their contributions are edited away
by Randy in Boise who heard somewhere that sword-wielding skeletons were
involved. And they get downright irate when asked politely to engage in
discourse with Randy until the sword-skeleton theory can be incorporated
into the article without passing judgment.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Rossi is suing Wikipedia for libel

[Jones Beene]

My guess is that Wiki will apologize and make the corrections as we speak. 

 

The Wiki top brass are not fools, even if a few of their editors are
complete idiots (not naming anyone in particular, of course :-)

 

.and there are some precedents for big judgments 

 

 

From: Daniel Rocha 

 

 
May 31st, 2013 at 2:53 PM

TO OUR READERS, REGARDING WIKIPEDIA:
I MUST AGAIN GIVE THIS INFORMATION: WIKIPEDIA, AFTER THEY WROTE US ( BY TOM
CONOVER) THAT THE PAGE HAD BEEN CORRECTED, TODAY AGAIN I SAW ON WIKIPEDIA
THE FALSE INFORMATION THAT THERE IS A SUE PENDING AGAINST ME FOR EVENTS OF
MY LIFE OF 20 YEARS AGO, FROM WHICH I HAVE BEEN ACQUITTED. TODAY AGAIN I
TRIED TO CORRECT THE FALSE INFORMATION, BUT NOT ONLY THE CORRECTION HAS BEEN
DELETED IN FEW SECONDS ( LESS THAN 1 MINUTE), BUT OUR IT GUY HAS BEEN BANNED
TO WRITE AGAIN ON WIKIPEDIA. 

 

Woman wins $11.3 million in Internet defamation case

South Florida Sun-Sentinel - October 12, 2006

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. - A Broward County, Fla., jury has awarded a woman
$11.3 million in an Internet defamation lawsuit that legal experts say could
spur more courtroom battles over what's said online.

Sue Scheff filed the lawsuit against Carey Bock in December 2003, after the
Louisiana woman called her a "crook," "con artist" and "fraud" on an
Internet message board for parents interested in alternative schools for
troubled teens.

One message landed on the Broward County PTA website, calling Scheff's
referral company for such parents "an old, old scam."

Legal experts say the Sept. 19 jury award may encourage more
Internet-related lawsuits, particularly as message boards, blogs and social
networking sites proliferate. Of the $11.3 million, almost half was awarded
as punitive damages.

"I think when people read about litigation and big awards, there is
sometimes an inspiring effect and others seek to imitate that success," said
Sandra S. Baron, executive director of Media Law Resource Center in New York
City.

But legal analysts warned that prospective plaintiffs shouldn't expect
similar large awards, because of the circumstances surrounding Scheff's
trial. Bock never showed up, meaning no defense was presented to the jury.

"Having a freakish (award) number where the defendant is not really
represented well or at all in front of the jury happens all the time," said
Robert Rivas, a media lawyer of the Boca Raton, Fla., law firm Sachs, Sax &
Klein.

Scheff's attorney David Pollack, however, said he believes the jury award
sends the message that those committing defamation or libel over the
Internet cannot escape responsibility for their actions.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi is suing Wikipedia for libel

[Mark Gibbs]

Rossi is infuriating. And his caps lock key is stuck.

[mg]


On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Daniel Rocha  wrote:

> No, that's all I had. Probably he deleted. Well, I hope someone else
> printed the screen...
>
>
> 2013/5/31 Mark Gibbs 
>
>> Daniel,
>>
>> The link you gave (May 31st, 2013 at 2:53 
>> PM)
>> doesn't have a posting with the text you quoted and I can't find that text
>> on the site. Can you send a link to the letter from Rossi you quoted?
>> Thanks.
>>
>> [mg]
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>>
>>> May 31st, 2013 at 2:53 
>>> PM
>>>
>>> TO OUR READERS, REGARDING WIKIPEDIA:
>>> I MUST AGAIN GIVE THIS INFORMATION: WIKIPEDIA, AFTER THEY WROTE US ( BY
>>> TOM CONOVER) THAT THE PAGE HAD BEEN CORRECTED, TODAY AGAIN I SAW ON
>>> WIKIPEDIA THE FALSE INFORMATION THAT THERE IS A SUE PENDING AGAINST ME FOR
>>> EVENTS OF MY LIFE OF 20 YEARS AGO, FROM WHICH I HAVE BEEN ACQUITTED. TODAY
>>> AGAIN I TRIED TO CORRECT THE FALSE INFORMATION, BUT NOT ONLY THE CORRECTION
>>> HAS BEEN DELETED IN FEW SECONDS ( LESS THAN 1 MINUTE), BUT OUR IT GUY HAS
>>> BEEN BANNED TO WRITE AGAIN ON WIKIPEDIA. FROM THIS FACT THE CONSEQUENCE IS
>>> THAT:
>>> 1- I HAVE IRREVOCABLY DECIDED TO SUE WIKIPEDIA FOR LIBELLING. ALL THE
>>> MONEY WE WILL OBTAIN AS A REFUND FOR THE DAMAGES THEY HAVE CAUSED, ARE
>>> CAUSING AND WILL CAUSE TO US WILL BE GIVEN TO A FAMILY THAT NEEDS IT FOR
>>> THE CARE OF A CHILD WHO HAS A CANCER
>>> 2- I INVITE EVERYBODY WHO WANTS TO HAVE NOT THE FALSE INFORMATION GIVEN
>>> BY WIKIPEDIA, BUT AN INFORMATION ADHERENT TO WHAT REALLY HAPPENED, CAN GO TO
>>> http://WWW.INGANDREAROSSI.COM 
>>> I HAVE BEEN ACQUITTED FROM ALL THE ACCUSATIONS FOR WHICH I HAD BEEN
>>> ARRESTED IN 1995 ( ARREST THAT CAUSED THE BANKRUPTS OF PETROLDRAGON AND
>>> OTHER MY COMPANIES, AFTER AN ASSASSINATION OF MY CHARACTER THAT NOW
>>> SOMEBODY IS TRYING TO REMAKE) AND WIKIPEDIA HAS PUBLISHED A FALSE
>>> INFORMATION. NO SUES OF ANY KIND ARE PENDING AGAINST ME AND I HAVE BEEN
>>> ACQUITTED FROM ALL THE CRIMES FOR WHICH I HAVE BEEN ARRESTED !. AND
>>> WIKIPEDIA KNOWS THIS, THEY KNOW THIS, BUT CONTINUE TO PUBLISH A FALSE
>>> INFORMATION EVEN IF THEY KNOW THAT IT IS FALSE  HOW CAN BE POSSIBLE A
>>> THING LIKE THIS 
>>> WIKIPEDIA HAS PUBLISHED A FALSE INFORMATION EVEN IF THEY HAVE BEEN
>>> INFORMED BY US THAT THE INFORMATION IS FALSE. THEY KNOW PERFECTLY THAT THE
>>> INFORMATION THAT THEY HAVE WRITTEN ON WIKIPEDIA ABOUT ME IS FALSE, BUT THEY
>>> REFUSE TO CORRECT THAT INFORMATION, AND REPEATEDLY CANCELLED THE
>>> CORRECTIONS, UNTIL TODAY, WHEN THEY, AFTER CANCELLING OUR CORRECTION, HAVE
>>> BANNED US FROM THE POSSIBILITY TO WRITE CORRECTIONS ON WIKIPEDIA. WIKIPEDIA
>>> IS PUBLISHING FALSE INFORMATION OF ME ALSO IF WIKIPEDIA KNOWS PERFECTLY
>>> THAT WHAT THEY HAVE WRITTEN IS FALSE.
>>> FOR THIS REASON THEY ARE SUED BY US FOR LIBELLING.
>>> ANDREA ROSSI
>>>
>>> --
>>> Daniel Rocha - RJ
>>> danieldi...@gmail.com
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Daniel Rocha - RJ
> danieldi...@gmail.com
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi is suing Wikipedia for libel

[Daniel Rocha]

No, that's all I had. Probably he deleted. Well, I hope someone else
printed the screen...


2013/5/31 Mark Gibbs 

> Daniel,
>
> The link you gave (May 31st, 2013 at 2:53 
> PM)
> doesn't have a posting with the text you quoted and I can't find that text
> on the site. Can you send a link to the letter from Rossi you quoted?
> Thanks.
>
> [mg]
>
>
> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>
>> May 31st, 2013 at 2:53 
>> PM
>>
>> TO OUR READERS, REGARDING WIKIPEDIA:
>> I MUST AGAIN GIVE THIS INFORMATION: WIKIPEDIA, AFTER THEY WROTE US ( BY
>> TOM CONOVER) THAT THE PAGE HAD BEEN CORRECTED, TODAY AGAIN I SAW ON
>> WIKIPEDIA THE FALSE INFORMATION THAT THERE IS A SUE PENDING AGAINST ME FOR
>> EVENTS OF MY LIFE OF 20 YEARS AGO, FROM WHICH I HAVE BEEN ACQUITTED. TODAY
>> AGAIN I TRIED TO CORRECT THE FALSE INFORMATION, BUT NOT ONLY THE CORRECTION
>> HAS BEEN DELETED IN FEW SECONDS ( LESS THAN 1 MINUTE), BUT OUR IT GUY HAS
>> BEEN BANNED TO WRITE AGAIN ON WIKIPEDIA. FROM THIS FACT THE CONSEQUENCE IS
>> THAT:
>> 1- I HAVE IRREVOCABLY DECIDED TO SUE WIKIPEDIA FOR LIBELLING. ALL THE
>> MONEY WE WILL OBTAIN AS A REFUND FOR THE DAMAGES THEY HAVE CAUSED, ARE
>> CAUSING AND WILL CAUSE TO US WILL BE GIVEN TO A FAMILY THAT NEEDS IT FOR
>> THE CARE OF A CHILD WHO HAS A CANCER
>> 2- I INVITE EVERYBODY WHO WANTS TO HAVE NOT THE FALSE INFORMATION GIVEN
>> BY WIKIPEDIA, BUT AN INFORMATION ADHERENT TO WHAT REALLY HAPPENED, CAN GO TO
>> http://WWW.INGANDREAROSSI.COM 
>> I HAVE BEEN ACQUITTED FROM ALL THE ACCUSATIONS FOR WHICH I HAD BEEN
>> ARRESTED IN 1995 ( ARREST THAT CAUSED THE BANKRUPTS OF PETROLDRAGON AND
>> OTHER MY COMPANIES, AFTER AN ASSASSINATION OF MY CHARACTER THAT NOW
>> SOMEBODY IS TRYING TO REMAKE) AND WIKIPEDIA HAS PUBLISHED A FALSE
>> INFORMATION. NO SUES OF ANY KIND ARE PENDING AGAINST ME AND I HAVE BEEN
>> ACQUITTED FROM ALL THE CRIMES FOR WHICH I HAVE BEEN ARRESTED !. AND
>> WIKIPEDIA KNOWS THIS, THEY KNOW THIS, BUT CONTINUE TO PUBLISH A FALSE
>> INFORMATION EVEN IF THEY KNOW THAT IT IS FALSE  HOW CAN BE POSSIBLE A
>> THING LIKE THIS 
>> WIKIPEDIA HAS PUBLISHED A FALSE INFORMATION EVEN IF THEY HAVE BEEN
>> INFORMED BY US THAT THE INFORMATION IS FALSE. THEY KNOW PERFECTLY THAT THE
>> INFORMATION THAT THEY HAVE WRITTEN ON WIKIPEDIA ABOUT ME IS FALSE, BUT THEY
>> REFUSE TO CORRECT THAT INFORMATION, AND REPEATEDLY CANCELLED THE
>> CORRECTIONS, UNTIL TODAY, WHEN THEY, AFTER CANCELLING OUR CORRECTION, HAVE
>> BANNED US FROM THE POSSIBILITY TO WRITE CORRECTIONS ON WIKIPEDIA. WIKIPEDIA
>> IS PUBLISHING FALSE INFORMATION OF ME ALSO IF WIKIPEDIA KNOWS PERFECTLY
>> THAT WHAT THEY HAVE WRITTEN IS FALSE.
>> FOR THIS REASON THEY ARE SUED BY US FOR LIBELLING.
>> ANDREA ROSSI
>>
>> --
>> Daniel Rocha - RJ
>> danieldi...@gmail.com
>>
>
>


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Rossi is suing Wikipedia for libel

[Mark Gibbs]

Daniel,

The link you gave (May 31st, 2013 at 2:53
PM)
doesn't have a posting with the text you quoted and I can't find that text
on the site. Can you send a link to the letter from Rossi you quoted?
Thanks.

[mg]


On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Daniel Rocha  wrote:

> May 31st, 2013 at 2:53 
> PM
>
> TO OUR READERS, REGARDING WIKIPEDIA:
> I MUST AGAIN GIVE THIS INFORMATION: WIKIPEDIA, AFTER THEY WROTE US ( BY
> TOM CONOVER) THAT THE PAGE HAD BEEN CORRECTED, TODAY AGAIN I SAW ON
> WIKIPEDIA THE FALSE INFORMATION THAT THERE IS A SUE PENDING AGAINST ME FOR
> EVENTS OF MY LIFE OF 20 YEARS AGO, FROM WHICH I HAVE BEEN ACQUITTED. TODAY
> AGAIN I TRIED TO CORRECT THE FALSE INFORMATION, BUT NOT ONLY THE CORRECTION
> HAS BEEN DELETED IN FEW SECONDS ( LESS THAN 1 MINUTE), BUT OUR IT GUY HAS
> BEEN BANNED TO WRITE AGAIN ON WIKIPEDIA. FROM THIS FACT THE CONSEQUENCE IS
> THAT:
> 1- I HAVE IRREVOCABLY DECIDED TO SUE WIKIPEDIA FOR LIBELLING. ALL THE
> MONEY WE WILL OBTAIN AS A REFUND FOR THE DAMAGES THEY HAVE CAUSED, ARE
> CAUSING AND WILL CAUSE TO US WILL BE GIVEN TO A FAMILY THAT NEEDS IT FOR
> THE CARE OF A CHILD WHO HAS A CANCER
> 2- I INVITE EVERYBODY WHO WANTS TO HAVE NOT THE FALSE INFORMATION GIVEN BY
> WIKIPEDIA, BUT AN INFORMATION ADHERENT TO WHAT REALLY HAPPENED, CAN GO TO
> http://WWW.INGANDREAROSSI.COM 
> I HAVE BEEN ACQUITTED FROM ALL THE ACCUSATIONS FOR WHICH I HAD BEEN
> ARRESTED IN 1995 ( ARREST THAT CAUSED THE BANKRUPTS OF PETROLDRAGON AND
> OTHER MY COMPANIES, AFTER AN ASSASSINATION OF MY CHARACTER THAT NOW
> SOMEBODY IS TRYING TO REMAKE) AND WIKIPEDIA HAS PUBLISHED A FALSE
> INFORMATION. NO SUES OF ANY KIND ARE PENDING AGAINST ME AND I HAVE BEEN
> ACQUITTED FROM ALL THE CRIMES FOR WHICH I HAVE BEEN ARRESTED !. AND
> WIKIPEDIA KNOWS THIS, THEY KNOW THIS, BUT CONTINUE TO PUBLISH A FALSE
> INFORMATION EVEN IF THEY KNOW THAT IT IS FALSE  HOW CAN BE POSSIBLE A
> THING LIKE THIS 
> WIKIPEDIA HAS PUBLISHED A FALSE INFORMATION EVEN IF THEY HAVE BEEN
> INFORMED BY US THAT THE INFORMATION IS FALSE. THEY KNOW PERFECTLY THAT THE
> INFORMATION THAT THEY HAVE WRITTEN ON WIKIPEDIA ABOUT ME IS FALSE, BUT THEY
> REFUSE TO CORRECT THAT INFORMATION, AND REPEATEDLY CANCELLED THE
> CORRECTIONS, UNTIL TODAY, WHEN THEY, AFTER CANCELLING OUR CORRECTION, HAVE
> BANNED US FROM THE POSSIBILITY TO WRITE CORRECTIONS ON WIKIPEDIA. WIKIPEDIA
> IS PUBLISHING FALSE INFORMATION OF ME ALSO IF WIKIPEDIA KNOWS PERFECTLY
> THAT WHAT THEY HAVE WRITTEN IS FALSE.
> FOR THIS REASON THEY ARE SUED BY US FOR LIBELLING.
> ANDREA ROSSI
>
> --
> Daniel Rocha - RJ
> danieldi...@gmail.com
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi is suing Wikipedia for libel

[Alain Sepeda]

not so stupid but winning is not the sucess.
the success will be to call mediatic buzz and make people aware that on
some subject wikipedia is controlled by trolls.

and it is not only on LENR, or even on well known controversies.
On some subject linked to radiation, they are deeply biased, and the bias
have increased.
and don't talk me of corps, like rossi they are powerless against lies.

and they on son subject refuse to enforce the know fact, letting
unjustified controversies and doubts, like they do on LENR.

today the popular guys, the holder of goodness, the official victims of the
evil empire, can do what they want, lie, agress, fraud... it is public and
unpunished... except a few affairs...


2013/6/1 Jed Rothwell 

> This is a stupid thing to do. It is a waste of Rossi's time and resources.
> He cannot win.
>
> However, Wikipedia deserves it!
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi is suing Wikipedia for libel

[Jed Rothwell]

This is a stupid thing to do. It is a waste of Rossi's time and resources.
He cannot win.

However, Wikipedia deserves it!

- Jed