Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

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

Original poster

<<whispers>> Was there ever any clarification about whether the issue with GF was swearing on here?

588 replies

hunkermunker · 22/05/2006 15:46

MN Towers, if you'd prefer it if this was deleted, please do so.

But I'm nosy. And I want to know. Please?

(I didn't swear in this, though I was tempted to...childish or what?!)

OP posts:
Jessajam · 25/05/2006 14:00

does a disclaimer help in this case?....don't wnat to be all negative but in some cases, those things where it says XYZ take no responsibility for any harm coming to you as you walk through our car park are fairly worthless if XYZ have failed to maintain said car park to safe standard...IYSWIM.
Having said that, I really think GF should 'rise above' all this and move on with her very successful career.

morningpaper · 25/05/2006 14:01

I'm obsessed too

I've only got this and the laundry to think about

Jimjamskeepingoffvaxthreads · 25/05/2006 14:08

What are the liability issues for a LLP? - I'm taking the chance to ask legal types here because dh is aways banging on about it and I tend to go to sleep (also I need to write a business plan and I need to know the difference).

Jimjamskeepingoffvaxthreads · 25/05/2006 14:09

oh he;'s not banging on about it in relation to GF, I doubt he knows who she is, he's just been going on about them for years, but I never get to the end of the conversation without my mind wandering.

zippitippitoes · 25/05/2006 14:12

a limited company often has to have personal guarantees from its directors when it borrows money, leases premises etc so sometimes the protection is not as great as you might think

jimjams i think there was US case about fish and aquariums

Jimjamskeepingoffvaxthreads · 25/05/2006 14:14

fish and aquariums??? PMSL how bizarre.

zippitippitoes · 25/05/2006 14:15

\link{http://dir.salon.com/story/tech/feature/2002/04/04/aquatic_plants/index.html\ a fishy fable}

GeorginaA · 25/05/2006 14:22

Anchovy: I should state at this point I am not a lawyer! I just followed Godfrey vs. Demon Internet fairly closely at the time, and have had the benefits of being a limited company drummed into me by dh both times he's been a director of a company!!

SaintGeorge · 25/05/2006 14:27

That makes very interesting reading zippi.

Worrying that so many of the defendants ended up settling out of court simply because they couldn't afford to defend themselves, despite the likelihood of court victory being high.

Anchovy · 25/05/2006 14:37

Jimjams - an LLP is a limited liability partnership. In general, a partnership (in the legal sense) does not have limited liability so each partner is liable for all of the debts of the partnership. (Very) broadly speaking an LLP is a form of partnership whereby the partners can enjoy the same sort of limited liability that shareholders in a company. Not likely to be relevant here, though as not usually used for trading businesses.

The point that Justine et al don't need to be concerned about losing their houses is right - I would expect Mumsnet to be a limited company and as such it is very difficult to look behind that to the individual shareholders. And I would put good money on them having a reasonable level of insurance cover for things like this. And they have disclaimers, have pulled the threads and have given appropriate "warnings" in the past.

I still would be hugely surprised if this got to court. Hugely.

Jimjamskeepingoffvaxthreads · 25/05/2006 14:39

Cheers Anchovy, I think you've answered what I needed to know (for my business plan- its a competition so not real life enough for me to go and pay any lawyers yet!)

ruty · 25/05/2006 14:40

what i don't understand is on what grounds can you issue court proceedings towards someone? I mean, if somebody said something bad about me or my business online, and if i had enough money, I could hire lawyers and force someone into settling without it going to court, just because i wanted to? Even if I was likely to lose in court? I can't understand how people can be forced to pay up just to avoid losing the roof over their heads, because someone else feels like it. I mean, so many high profile people have things said about them on the internet [I am not saying this is OK I am just saying it is pretty much everywhere.] It seems like a terrible loophole in the law.

ruty · 25/05/2006 14:41

If i were GF i would be far more worried about the media fall out of this thing going to court than what a few mums said on a internet forum. I really wonder if she is getting the right legal advice.

ruty · 25/05/2006 14:42

sounds reassuring Anchovy.

Caligula · 25/05/2006 15:55

It's because the libel law is there to protect the rich, Ruty. There is no legal aid for libel cases, so there's no question of anyone on a low or even average income ever being able to use it.

It should be abolished. Or at least reformed.

ruty · 25/05/2006 16:44

agree Caligula.

MNHQ
JustineMumsnet · 25/05/2006 18:12

Dear all,
We have so far avoided posting too much about all this as we have no wish to inflame the situation but it’s clear that many members understandably have concerns, so we thought it best to clarify a few things.

Gina Ford, via her solicitors, has made the following six demands:

  1. That we publish a statement in which clarify that Gina Ford’s objection is to personal attacks not criticism of her methods.
  2. That we implement a procedure whereby we review postings on a regular basis each day and delete any postings which are derogatory and/or defamatory of Gina Ford.
  3. That we delete a list of 21 specified threads from our boards, archives and all other records.
  4. That we prevent search engines producing summaries or links to defamatory material previously posted on Mumsnet
  5. That we pay damages to Gina Ford (unspecified)
  6. That we pay all Gina Ford’s legal costs in respect to Mumsnet

Essentially we have agreed or partially agreed to comply with numbers one to four to Gina Ford’s lawyers’ satisfaction, but not agreed to points 5&6. Consequently Gina Ford intends to litigate against Mumsnet.

Mumsnet is indeed a limited company but in cases of libel it is individual publishers whose assets are at risk rather than companies.

It is our view, though we cannot say for sure, that though Ms Ford’s lawyers have previously threatened legal action against one Mumsnet member at least to our knowledge, the intention is to take proceedings against Mumsnet rather than individual posters. Please do contact us if you have reason to believe otherwise and we will happily give as much advice and assistance as we can.

Many thanks to all who have offered support and good wishes. We are, needless to say, extremely sad that this situation has both arisen and escalated to such proportions. We’ll keep you posted with regard to further events.

Best,
MN Towers

Original poster
hunkermunker · 25/05/2006 18:14

Oh, Justine Sad

Would write more, but DS2 is currently filling his nappy, loudly and copiously. He's an early critic, shall we say?

OP posts:
bundle · 25/05/2006 18:16

oh Justine, what a tough situation. you know you can rely on us for support, including rattling tins for donations Smile

Blandmum · 25/05/2006 18:17

hells bells.

What bundle says.

Marina · 25/05/2006 18:18

:( Thanks for the clarification.
You know you can count on us to do what we can to help. XXX

tortoiseshell · 25/05/2006 18:18
Sad
SparklyGothKat · 25/05/2006 18:26

OMGosh!!! :(

PanicPants · 25/05/2006 18:34

:(

expatinscotland · 25/05/2006 18:35

WHY can't ALL mention of her be banned entirely? Why? Just to avoid anything she might find 'defamatory'?

Why should this site be manipulated by her and her team to provide only opinions which she considers acceptable?

BAN ALL MENTION OF HER ENTIRELY!

I would gladly toss in a few bob or whatever I had rattling around to support whatever MN needs.