From: ykcheu@eos.ncsu.edu (YIHNSIANG KASAMA CHEU)
Subject: UPDATE-vote for buyers beware list
Originator: ykcheu@c00413-313mn.eos.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: ykcheu@eos.ncsu.edu (YIHNSIANG KASAMA CHEU)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 13:21:11 GMT


Thanks for all your comments and advice that you gave me for all of you who
voted.  Your comments and opinions are welcomed and respected.  So far, I've
received only one rude letter (which I deserved, since I was rude to the
mailer also).  For those of you who do not know what this is about, this is
a vote to see whether or not to start a buyers beware list, which will have
on it the e-mail addresses of those people who have been complained against.
(For those of you who do not want to see the continuing of this process,
better get you votes in, because the YES votes are winning by a 2 to 1
majority).

There are some 'legal' issues to consider (if the YES vote is to win) coming
from people who gave me some wise comments concerning whether or not the
moderator of the list could be sued for slander or just putting an e-mail
address without the permission of the person being complained against...

Here are the propositions that many of the people gave (most of them voting
NO because of it):

	1:  Is it legal to post an e-mail address without the permission of
		the owner of the e-mail address (or other relevent
		information about him)?

	2:  Verification problems.  It would be too hard to verify whether
		or not the complaints or true or whether they were just
		lies.

	3:  People can change their e-mail address and therefore the system
		is useless.

	4:  You could be sued for defamation of character by posting their
		e-mail address (or id, or whatever...)


	5:  You should start a list which contains the e-mail address' of
		those buyers that are considered reliable.

Here are my answers (with the answers of some other people who voted YES)
	to these questions.  Although I, myself, can't decide these issues
	(the moderator of the list, as well as the people of the net will
	decide), hopefully, some of these propositions can be solved here.
	
	1:  Is it legal to post an e-mail address without the owner's
		permission?

		This I seriously doubt.  If this were true then I could sue
		20-30 people right now for posting my e-mail address without
		my permission (and 5-6 people could sue me in turn).  If
		posting of the e-mail address results in economic loss to
		the offended party, and the accusations are false, then
		the accuser and possibly the moderator (depending on how
		he worded his list on how it is to be presented)_could
		be sued for the amount that was lost (very hard to prove
		over the internet, since documents can be easily forged
		that are posted through e-mail and the networks).

	2:  Verification problems.  It is too hard to verify whether or not
		the accused or accuser are telling lies.

		The e-mail address' of the accused and accuser's e-mail
		address' could be posted so that people can here both
		sides of their stories and then decide for themselves
		who's telling the truth.  Alternatively, the stories could
		be posted with the list, although that would make the list
		incredibly long.  (Thanks Dave Croson for the advice).

	3:  People can change their e-mail address'...

		The e-mail address, as well as the accussed person's name
		should be posted so that in case a buyer write's a check,
		he/she will know whether or not the person he/she is
		writing to is on the list or not (people's names are hard to
		change, although there is little that can be done about this
		if someone decides to do this, or get his/her relatives to
		cheat other people.  Although their names will also
		eventually appear on the list).

	4:  You could be sued for defamation of character by posting their
		e-mail address or id...

		I've watched cases like this on "The People's Court", and
		my understading of what a successful suit against defamation
		of character is that you must prove 2 things:
		(I hope there are some legal experts out there that can
		help me on this one)...

		1:  That the accuser made the defamatory remark without
			any foundation for the accusation.
			(That is, if I called you a liar and did not know
			whether you were a liar or not, even if you were
			a liar, then that would be defamatory.  However,
			if I had some evidence, or observed you in the
			process of lying, even if you're generally an
			honest person, then that would not be defamatory).

		2:  The defematory remark must result in economic loss.
			Even if the accusation was unfounded, you still
			could not successfully sue him/her unless you could
			prove, in court, that some economic loss resulted from
			the remark (very hard to do, since e-mail can be
			easily forged, and it is very hard to prove whether
			or not someone out there might have bought your
			product or not if they had seen or heard the
			defamation unless they actually wrote and signed
			a paper saying that they specifically did not buy
			your product because they heard the remark (in real
			life, that is very unlikely).

	The moderator of the group, could not be sued, successfully, if he
	worded his list, carefully, such as saying:
		"The moderator doesn't have any
idea whether these accusations have merit or not; the list appears as a matter
of record only that the accuser has claimed a problem; contact the accuser
before assuming that the accusation is true, etc."
	(Thanks again Dave Croson).
	Since the moderator is not defaming the character of the accused,
	he could not be successfully sued.  The person who made the accusation,
	however, could be sued, although they would have to prove the two
	things mentioned above.
	

	5:  You should start a list containing the e-mail address' of those
		who are known to be reliable to deal with.

		This is an excellent idea, and hopefully the moderator or
		the accuser(s) won't be sued for putting the accused name
		on the list.



Send all of your votes to:

			ykcheu@eos.ncsu.edu