From zakk@firebutton.org Fri Nov 2 00:02:04 2001
Subject: Re: Libelous "Time Doctor" postings on slashdot
From: zakk <zakk@firebutton.org>
To: Don Hopkins <xardox@mindspring.com>
In-Reply-To: <013601c16345$257e1e00$6501a8c0@brickshithouse>
References: <013601c16345$257e1e00$6501a8c0@brickshithouse>
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Mailer: Evolution/0.15 (Preview Release)
Date: 02 Nov 2001 00:02:04 -0500
Message-Id: <1004677325.19616.14.camel@TARDIS>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Evolution-Account: zakk@firebutton.org
X-Evolution-Fcc: file:///home/zakk/evolution/local/Sent
X-Evolution-Format: text/plain
X-Evolution-Account: zakk@firebutton.org
X-Evolution: 00000088-0010
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Mr. Hopkins,
In order for a statement to be libelous it must meet a few
qualifications.  The statement must be defamatory, meaning it harms the
reputation of the other person, as opposed to being merely insulting. 
For a private individual, it must also be shown that the statement was
made in negligence, or that the person making the statement did not act
with due care.

Time_Doctor (I, zakk@icculus.org) said:
"Of course you don't seem to understand that loki is still releasing
games, and Don Hopkins is still charging 80 dollars for a networkable
version of sim city (the original) in tcl/tk."

You later state that you actually charged $89 for this product at one
time.  This statement cannot be considered libelous, taking into
consideration the informal nature of the forum and comment.  Considering
that my estimation was only $9 away from the actual price, it cannot be
said that I was negligent in making this comment.

I said:
"I've heard that the networking doesn't work"

This statement is not libelous, since I clearly state that the
information is second hand, and therefore cannot be assumed to be
reliable.

I said:
"Don Hopkins seems to enjoy lining his pockets and repeating the market
speak of native ports being bad"

Anyone that sells anything is actively in the process of "lining their
pockets", since the goal of capitalism is to make a profit off of one's
product.  The fact that you have not made money off of this product for
years is completely irrelevant, since I would have no possible way of
knowing this.  While the statement may have been made in a context
reflecting a negative view of your actions, that alone does not account
for libel, since I had no access to facts that would indicate my claim
was false.

Please also note that I'm not alone in my negative comments.

In the comments you have posted, you call me foolish, hypocritical, and
childish.  You also make various negative implications about the
character of Scott Draeker.  If you continue to assert that my comments
legally qualify as libel, please be aware that your own comments also
apply.

While my comments may be "close to" libel, several of your own reactions
are "close to" serious crimes, aside from the aforementioned negative
remarks.  Taking the time to look up five of my email addresses (some of
which are dead, since I no-longer work for/represent
linuxgames.com/retrofaction.com/openverse.org) is "close to" an invasion
of privacy.  Sending an email that is over 50KB to 14 recipients is
"close to" spamming. Quoting me without my permission is also
dangerously close to a "violation" of "copyright law". If we are to
threaten lawsuits on what was "almost" a crime, perhaps you should be
the one being threatened.
-- 
-zakk
zakk@firebutton.org
zakk@icculus.org