Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk

Back to thread
Original poster

to draw your attention to MN'ers being threatened with court for posting

17 replies

gordyslovesheep · 09/10/2014 16:07

By Samaritan's Purse

I know I'm not the only one

who else have they decided to silence?

It's quite interesting that they dislike criticism so much

Go to post
MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 09/10/2014 16:43

Hello

We ask for posters' contact details in these circumstances because the law (the 2013 Defamation Act) requires us to

We do NOT pass on these details to the complaining party unless you give us permission to do so

And there is certainly no question of us 'publishing' them anywhere.

We're sorry if the mails we sent were at all unclear on that point - we had thought we had included something saying that we would NOT pass on your details without your permission, but we will check.

MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 09/10/2014 16:54

@Rusticated

Rowan, but are you saying that posts will be deleted if a poster like Gordy or Suffolk doesn't give permission for you to forward their details to SP?

No.

Posters are given the choice of whether they want to withdraw the posts or not.

The law says that posters need to provide us with their details, but NOT that those details must be passed on to the complaining party. The choice of whether or not to pass on details does NOT affect whether the post is removed or not.

MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 09/10/2014 16:55

@PausingFlatly

Oi, everyone! Not MNHQ's fault! They have to follow the law.

Which in this case means they have to ask to pass details on - but one can say no.

Yes!

MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 09/10/2014 16:57

@SuffolkNWhat

What we need from you now is your response to this complaint - so could you please let us know:

? whether or not you'd like your post to be deleted
? your full name and address, if you'd like your post to remain
? whether you agree to us sending on these details to the complainant

If you don't agree to us passing on your details, we won't release them unless we're ordered to do so by a court.

^That is C/P from the email I got. It reads that in order for my posts to remain I have to give MNHQ my personal info.

Right - really sorry Suffolk, we do see that it's not totally clear.

You do need to provide us with your details for your post to remain.

But we do not pass these on to the complaining party without your permission. Your post can remain without your details being passed to them.

MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 09/10/2014 16:59

Does that make sense now or have we confused everyone further?

While we're here: please just bear in mind that Samaritan's Purse maintain that the complained-about posts are untrue, or contain things that are untrue. We (as MNHQ) don't take a view on that either way, but that is their position.

MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 09/10/2014 17:03

@PastorOfMuppets

What if you already hold the details they require?

Would you tell us they had asked for them or wait until they actually got a court order?

We just follow the set process each time - we don't freestyle!

MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 09/10/2014 17:10

@SuffolkNWhat

I'm part of the MN panel so my details are held by MNHQ already hence why my posts have been deleted just in case they are passed on.

Really can't say this clearly enough - we would NOT pass on your details without your consent. As per our privacy policy: 'We do not, as a clear and overarching rule, pass on your information, unless you specifically consent to us doing so or we are specifically required to by law. However, on rare occasions where there appears to be a clear need to safeguard the welfare of a Mumsnetter and/or his/her family, it may be necessary to contact relevant authorities about a clearly identifiable member and his/her posts on Mumsnet.'

MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 09/10/2014 17:14

@TweetingInFury

"or we are specifically required to by law" So you would pass them on if court ordered regardless of whether a poster said yes or no?

We always take things on a case by case basis, but a court order is a court order!

MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 09/10/2014 17:16

@PastorOfMuppets

Or by a Court Order, you said, didn;t you, Rowan? So if you already have those details and OCC pursued this would you be compelled by law to hand over those details?

The posts would only be still standing if you'd chosen to supply us with your details, so it's not a situation that's likely to arise.

MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 09/10/2014 17:21

@SuffolkNWhat

So if OCC decide to proceed with court action are you saying my details (which are he through the panel) will not be given out?

On a v quick reading, this is actually a point on which the Act is silent. Don't want to give you an answer that turns out to be wrong so we will confer with the higher-ups and come back to you.

MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 09/10/2014 17:23

@SuffolkNWhat

but a court order is a court order!

Right I want all my details removed from your systems NOW and email confirmation of this TODAY.

This involves de-regging you - do you want us to do that now?

MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 09/10/2014 17:38

@VivaLeBeaver

I understand what Rowan is saying.

If you give them your details they won't pass them on......unless there's a court order.

Rowan, what's to stop people giving you incorrect details? I set my account up with a yahoo email. I set my yahoo email up with a fake name and address. If I use a roaming IP thingy I think I'm a secret squirrel.

however I've willingly given you my correct details in the past for surveys, competitions, etc. would you pass those on if a court ordered you to?

The Act requires us to keep an eye out for details that are obviously fake (MrsMinnieMouse of Toytown, that sort of thing).

The Act just doesn't seemed to have envisaged a circumstance in which a poster's details would already be held by the organisation for some other reason. And it probably wouldn't occur to most complainants either.

We're trying to get an answer for you and will let you know.

MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 09/10/2014 17:39

@Calaveras

its now 21 minutes since i asked you to clarify.

I'm still waiting.

If our posts that have been complained about are deleted, and you already have our information on file because of us being posted prizes or being panel members, can the complainant still get a court order telling you to give over our personal details?

We understand you want an answer Calaveras but we think it's best that the answer is correct, rather than swift but wrong.

MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 09/10/2014 17:41

@PastorOfMuppets

MNHQ seem unsure on that point, Viva. Might have been an idea to brush up on what the Act actually means for an anonymous site that holds a proportion of user details for other purposes before they sent out threatening emails.

It's not in the Act, Pastor. And the mails we send out are what the Act requires us to send out. If we didn't send those mails we'd just have to delete every single post that gets complained about on the basis of libel or defamation.

MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 09/10/2014 17:46

@SuffolkNWhat

Exactly that Calaveras. I don't want to have to dereg but will if needed Rowan.

Understood - it's up to you so maybe have a think about it and mail us at [email protected] when you've decided (which may be contingent on our response to the outstanding question of course).

MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 09/10/2014 22:40

Hello

Apologies - we like to keep all libel-related emails together and dealt with in the main by the full daytime team, which is why not everything has been being actioned immediately.

The Act requires a response from the poster within the specified timeframe, which is five full non-working days.

That said, we really don't want to cause further anxiety so we will check your reports now prism, and we're sorry for causing you alarm.

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 10/10/2014 00:10

Just to give you a bit of background to this... we've been contacted frequently by Samaritan's Purse over the course of the last 12 months asking for us to delete posts on Mumsnet.

Since July we've had around 20 emails from them asking us to delete various individual posts and all the threads relating to their organisation on MN prior to Brian's appearance on Mumsnet last year. We didn't comply to those requests.

Then yesterday, SP reported a number of those posts as being defamatory . At that point - under section 5 the new defamation act - we as an online publisher are required to contact posters and to give them the option to delete the complained about posts or to stand by them, in which case the poster has to provide their contact details, so they are contactable in the event of any possible legal action.

It's actually, we think, quite a sensible solution to the problem of online libel - if you're happy to stand by your words - and bear in mind there are a number of defences in libel, most obviously that your words are accurate/true (here's further explanation: www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/26/crossheading/defences/enacted) then you can.

If you're concerned that a post may not be entirely accurate or just don't feel inclined to pass on your contact details to us, then we can remove the post, in which case that would very likely be an end to the matter.

Previously most websites pretty much just removed stuff when they received a defamation complaint - because there was too much risk of becoming embroiled in a myriad of legal actions and they may not know the truth of the matter - now at least the procedure gives users the chance to stand by their words. In that sense this new system is much more amenable to freedom of speech than the previous one.

But of course it does mean we have to send these rather daunting legalesey emails which can seem to be a bit big brother. What's important to remember is that providing contact details to us or any online publisher, doesn't necessarily mean anyone's taking anyone to court. It's just the hoop which websites are obliged by the defamation law to go through, and which allows us not to knee-jerk delete your words whenever someone's shouting libel.

Watch this thread for updates

Tap "Watch" to get all the latest updates

End of posts

There are no more MNHQ posts on this thread

Back to thread