Click Official ELI Links
Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support | ELI Legal Representation Program
Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters.

Author Topic: Section 230 of Communications Deceny Act  (Read 5332 times)

lucia

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 767
    • View Profile
Re: Section 230 of Communications Deceny Act
« Reply #15 on: February 25, 2013, 12:27:08 AM »
Great info Oscar!! I agree focus on only showing her claim are BS, I know we want to expose her and her scheme and her habit of trying to squelch free speech, but this might not be the correct arena to do so..

I have her address if you need it!  :D

Yes. I think in court you need to focus on the specific. Ellis has alleged "X" so she needs to bring evidence to support "X", not "Y". And Matt then needs to show the allegations of "X" are false. 

I think the CDA stuff in interesting, but it has more to do with defamation not harassment. While it is true that Matt cannot be held liable for defamatory comments by anyone other than Matt, that's not relevant because Ellis hasn't filed a defamation suit. She is alleging stalking.

So, if I understand Oscar correctly,  Matt has to focus on the fact that he hasn't stalked her because he has done none of these: contacted her, followed her or put her under surveillance.  And if he hasn't done those then he hasn't stalked under the laws of GA. Oscar has provided Matt with the law to site stating that posting on an internet forum is not "contacting" as that is defined under the stalking laws in GA.  So, Linda is going to have nothing: Not one single instance of any action that meets GA's definition of stalking.

Given the strength of this very simple stuff, it's not in Matt's interest to go off on a tangent about a law that relates to defamation.

I do think if Matt follows Oscars advice about sending the certified letter stating he is going to request attorneys fees under those other GA statutes and if after receiving the letter, Ellis decides to not drop the stalking claim, then Matt might be able to make some statements about freedom of speech. He'll also have the opportunity to wax eloquently about that outside court.

April Brown (AuctionApril)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
    • View Profile
    • AprilBrown.com
Re: Section 230 of Communications Deceny Act
« Reply #16 on: February 25, 2013, 12:30:05 PM »
I confess, I have not read every single case on the legal but if Linda does show up this week and when she loses, would Matthew want to sue her? If so, what would the allegation be?

I am worried somewhat that Linda won't show up. This case is critical to my future extortion filing and I really appreciate all this work everyone has put into it. My guess is that no other "defendant" has walked into a courtroom with more evidence, preparation and big guns. (not literally big guns)

I do have a couple reporters lined up so I need to know if this is an open hearing and reporters and bloggers are allowed to sit in. It would also be nice to know how big the courtroom or hearing area is. Any thoughts from you are appreciated. I will need to finalize the message to them today. Matthew are you interested in a radio interview on a Marietta station before the hearing?

« Last Edit: February 25, 2013, 02:29:51 PM by Matthew Chan »

UncleJohnsBand

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 128
    • View Profile
    • ExtortionLetterInfo
Re: Section 230 of Communications Deceny Act
« Reply #17 on: February 25, 2013, 12:58:00 PM »
I confess, I have not read every single case on the legal but if Linda does show up this week and when she loses, would Matthew want to sue her? If so, what would the allegation be?

I am worried somewhat that Linda won't show up. This case is critical to my future extortion filing and I really appreciate all this work everyone has put into it. My guess is that no other "defendant" as walked into a courtroom with more evidence, preparation and big guns. (not literally big guns)

I do have a couple reporters lined up so I need to know if this is an open hearing and reporters and bloggers are allowed to sit in. It would also be nice to know how big the courtroom or hearing area is. Any thoughts from you are appreciated. I will need to finalize the message to them today. Matthew are you interested in a radio interview on a Marietta station before the hearing?

Check out Oscar's post in this thread for the answer to your first question can be found earlier in this thread.

I would assume the hearing is public.  Unfortunately, it probably cannot be live streamed on someone's iPhone.  I would guess there is enough room for interested reporters and bloggers.

I am still betting on her trying to get an extension.   
« Last Edit: February 25, 2013, 01:01:26 PM by UncleJohnsBand »

Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)

  • ELI Defense Team Member
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3360
    • View Profile
    • ExtortionLetterInfo
Re: Section 230 of Communications Deceny Act
« Reply #18 on: February 25, 2013, 01:25:38 PM »
I confess, I have not read every single case on the legal but if Linda does show up this week and when she loses, would Matthew want to sue her? If so, what would the allegation be?

I am worried somewhat that Linda won't show up. This case is critical to my future extortion filing and I really appreciate all this work everyone has put into it. My guess is that no other "defendant" as walked into a courtroom with more evidence, preparation and big guns. (not literally big guns)

I do have a couple reporters lined up so I need to know if this is an open hearing and reporters and bloggers are allowed to sit in. It would also be nice to know how big the courtroom or hearing area is. Any thoughts from you are appreciated. I will need to finalize the message to them today. Matthew are you interested in a radio interview on a Marietta station before the hearing?

Check out Oscar's post in this thread for the answer to your first question can be found earlier in this thread.

I would assume the hearing is public.  Unfortunately, it probably cannot be live streamed on someone's iPhone.  I would guess there is enough room for interested reporters and bloggers.

I am still betting on her trying to get an extension.

I doubt she'll get an extension, I think she'll show up and be a fumbling idiot..most courts are not going to allow recording and will require cell phones be turned off before entering the court room. Even if the hearing is not open to the public, we can easy get a copy of the entire hearing as it will be public record.... Unfortunately I will not be able to make the trip as my schedule is filled the enitre week.. I was hoping to surprise Matthew by just showing up..
Most questions have already been addressed in the forums, get yourself educated before making decisions.

Any advice is strictly that, and anything I may state is based on my opinions, and observations.
Robert Krausankas

I have a few friends around here..

Matthew Chan

  • ELI Founder, "Cult Leader", Grand Poobah, Big Cheese
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2773
  • 1st Amendment & Section 230 CDA Advocate
    • View Profile
    • Defiantly
Re: Section 230 of Communications Deceny Act
« Reply #19 on: February 25, 2013, 02:36:34 PM »
April, my feeling is the more publicity on this case, the better.  TV, Radio, Magazine, Blog, etc. bring it on!  I welcome media coverage and have no problems going on camera.  The case of Linda Ellis vs. Matthew Chan is newsworthy for so many reasons.  I am happy to speak to anyone in the press. I stand by my integrity and I feel quite strongly about my position.

Regarding the 10th floor courtroom of where my hearing is going to be, I think it will be large enough to accommodate a number of spectators.

For the record, I asked for a continuance for more time to prepare and was promptly turned down. Now that I am well-prepared, I will stringently object to any continuance that will continue to hold this TPO over my head any longer this necessary.

I am ready for Thursday to present my case.
I'm a non-lawyer but not legally ignorant either. Under the 1st Amendment, I have the right to post facts & opinions using rhetorical hyperbole, colloquialisms, metaphors, parody, snark, epithets, & profanity. Under Section 230 of CDA, I'm only responsible for posts I write, not what others write.

Jerry Witt (mcfilms)

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 682
    • View Profile
    • Motion City
Re: Section 230 of Communications Deceny Act
« Reply #20 on: February 25, 2013, 08:20:33 PM »
Oscar's post is pure gold. I hope (and assume) you will follow his advice. Nothing helps prevent frivolous lawsuits more than making them have real costs to those filing them.
Although I may be a super-genius, I am not a lawyer. So take my scribblings for what they are worth and get a real lawyer for real legal advice. But if you want media and design advice, please visit Motion City at http://motioncity.com.

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 
Official ELI Help Options
Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support Call | ELI Defense Letter Program
Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters.