Sign in or Join FriendFeed
FriendFeed is the easiest way to share online. Learn more »
Rachel Walden
@clinicalreader agreed w/ @stevelawson "concerns about @eagledawg post were genuine"-nothing in post to warrant legit legal threat
In response to @stevelawson's tweet that @clinicalreader should apologize to @eagledawg - @clinicalreader said: "I need personally look into this in more detail, as concerns about @eagledawg post were genuine" (http://twitter.com/Clinica...). - Rachel Walden
their concerns or eagledawgs concerns? - Sir Shuping is just sir
I read it as their (CR's) concerns. In which case I think somebody still needs to work on their understanding of both the internet and what are not legitimate grounds for legal threats. Not sure, though. - Rachel Walden
Agreed, Rachel. One complicating factor might be--as I understand it--the much looser definition of defamation in England than in the US. Still. I think they need to apologize for immediately threatening legal action. - Steele Lawman
That's what I thought...they should apologize to Niki and then maybe offer to work w/her/others on addressing concerns - Sir Shuping is just sir
If what I wrote is defamation, they'll be after Steve next ;) - Nikki D.