Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

MNHQ

Update on the Gina Ford legal situation

732 replies

JustineMumsnet · 25/02/2007 19:58

Hello all,
Some of you may have seen a Gina Ford interview in the Mail on Sunday today, in which she refers to the Mumsnet legal situation, so we thought it was only right to update you as to where we are.

We are due to go to mediation on March 7th. Our position with regard to this hasn't changed - since very early on in the dispute we have suggested mediation as a sensible way forward and so we are pleased to be meeting with Ms Ford and her lawyers on March 7th.

In the meantime GF has issued a claim form, which means that the court clock is now running and we have to put in our defence within 28 days.

Obviously, as Ms Ford has made clear by this action and by her statements in the Mail on Sunday if mediation fails, she intends to sue.

We're sorry that we are still having to ask you not to discuss Gina Ford or her methods but given the potential for something that may be used against Mumsnet to slip through, this probably remains the safest course of action.

We will, of course, keep you fully updated.

Thanks for all your support.
Mumsnet HQ

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Fubsy · 10/03/2007 23:40

Just a little postscript - what are SWMNBN's qualifications? The term nurse is protected under law, and "maternity nurse" does not exist as a profession, unlike "Nursery Nurse", "Paediatric Nurse", "Midwife" etc. It is against the law to claim to be a nurse unless you have nursing qualifications, which is why auxilliary nurses are now termed healthcare assistants.

Judy1234 · 06/03/2007 16:14

Cam, sometimes individuals are sued to discourage others. The BPI sued 20 or 30 people police inspectors, university professors and others for downloading music without paying and put all the details on their web site. One company wrote to 750,000 individuals who had downloaded without permission. On libel in that Bunt case three individual posters were sued - people get cross when they are allegedly libelled and it isn't always just about money, although you are right that in most cases you sue who has money.

zippitippitoes · 06/03/2007 15:01

I'm not sure about the no money bit

I'm sure many individuals do have money, property, businesses etc

CAM · 06/03/2007 14:57

Yes Xenia but no=one would sue an individual as there is no money to be gained from it.......................

SoupDragon · 06/03/2007 12:03

My post isn't there yet...

Judy1234 · 06/03/2007 11:25

There is and never has been any doubt at all that posters on line who defame can be sued. That is why people need to ensure they don't post defamatory comments. Most people don't. Things that are true are not libellous.

Every day of the week those hosting sites are told to take down illegal material and they do.

However even if something is defamatory there is still the question of who is liable for it - see my link to the Bunt case below where AOL, Tiscali and others were not and the judge said go off and sue the 3 individuals who posted the stuff and leave the internet service providers alone.

lissielou · 06/03/2007 11:06

pmsl @ the link. and thats all i have to say on the matter

lets just say that swmnbn wins this case, where does it stop? footballers could sue sports forums for comments about a 7-0 thrashing! movie reviewers will have to publish positive reviews, just in case someone takes offence. ive been slated on mn lots for my opinions on things like weaning, should i sue now for defamitory comments? once you put your thoughts into the public domain you leave yourself open for criticism personal as well as professional. if this post breaks therules im sorry please get it deleted!

SoupDragon · 06/03/2007 10:49

I@ve just posted my comments on the link given by foreverblowingbubbles... They were calm, well reasoned, did not mention mumsnet and were completely non defamatory but I wonder if they will be published...?

daisycat01 · 06/03/2007 10:24

I missed it, is it going to be repeated at all??

BizzyDint · 06/03/2007 10:17

i liked the cartoon of the radio phone in with miriam stoppard.

Freckle · 06/03/2007 10:06

I will have to watch it again as MIL telephoned just as Justine started to speak. I mean, how could she???

Enid · 06/03/2007 09:55

the cartoon bits were hilarious

fryalot · 06/03/2007 09:54

I thought the best comment was about mumsnet being an important link to mums everywhere - perhaps mums who cannot get out as they are sticking to a rigid routine.

dp & me rofl at that one!

tortoiseSHELL · 06/03/2007 09:44

The best comment on that whole programme last night (hope I'm allowed to say this) was after they quoted the terrorist quote and Justine responded 'That was a joke....' dh nearly phsl...

ruty · 06/03/2007 09:43

From the website you just linked to: 'A short time ago Mumsnet published an item which compared me with terrorists in the Middle East. As can be imagined, this caused me a huge amount of upset and distress.'

I can't understand how anyone can have taken that remark with an iota of seriousness.

ForeverBlowingBubbles · 06/03/2007 00:50

More from the other side of the fence HERE which is SWMNBN's other website. If I'm wrong to post this, please report it and get it deleted, thanks.

Best of luck, MNHQ, I really hope this all goes your way!

SmilingKiwi · 05/03/2007 22:12

Cheers for Mumsnet! Just very proud to be lucky to know of this brilliant website and support it all the way...
Thanks MumsnetHQ!
x

BabiesEverywhere · 05/03/2007 21:23

PMSL, I'm not meant to look at you

Love the cartoon bits and the music

Judy1234 · 05/03/2007 21:22

TV and papers have very good libel lawyers. It will all have been checked out and there will be contracts dealing with who is liable for what anyway.

sparklybits · 05/03/2007 21:20

hope miriam stoppard has a rainy day fund

BabiesEverywhere · 05/03/2007 21:13

Well, after the first 10 minutes I can see several lawsuits heading towards several other parenting guru's offices

BabiesEverywhere · 05/03/2007 21:04

GINA FORD DOCUMENTARY

Now on Five Life channel

Switch over now

Mercy · 05/03/2007 19:48

I don't understand what maverickgenious is on about tbh

The winner of last year's Times Person of the Year was 'You'. Is this some sort of code?

Judy1234 · 05/03/2007 19:43

You're right actually. There needs to be a crime like price fixing or fraud. Is there "criminal libel" of any kind? I have someone who did something on line which isn't illegal. If he steps foot on US soil even for holidays they will arrest him but has no assets in the US so they can't get him (... although what about those extra-ordinary renditions the US did for terrorist - bundling people up and just taking them away... absolutely disgusting)...

But I suppose what I really should have said you move your server but if you assets are still in the UK they can be got if you're not operating through a company or they can't get behind the company. I know someone who moved to Thailand without a forwarding address but that was to avoid paying his wife a single penny of his money on divorce.

Anyway with will and compromise on both sides and everyone realising you're foolish to take these things further I am sure it can be finished at mediation with press releases which make both sides look like they have won.

Piffle · 05/03/2007 15:55

I think extradition is not for civil cases.
Natwest bankers (contentious in the extreme) and terrorists/in the interests of national security only supposedly.