Read this Blog Post on a libel suit in France.
On June 25, 2010, Professor Joseph Weiler, editor of the European Journal of International Law, will stand trial in a French criminal court for running a mildly negative book review on a journal-associated website.You get a bad review and you sue for libel? This is going too far.
The book in question is The Trial Proceedings of the International Criminal Court by the Israeli law professor Dr. Karin N. Calvo-Goller. According to the reviewer the main part of the book “simply restates the…relevant parts of the ICC Statute.” This rehashing, he adds, is particularly unproductive since a large part of the volume consists of a reprint of the Statute itself.
Hat tip to Instapundit.
Then we have an Italian Judge beating up on Google—not that I think Google is as ethical as it claims. For those of you interested in the view from The New York Times, we have Ms Rachel Donadio's news report-cum-editorial.
While I think that Smoot Hawley gave us the "Great" in the Great Depression and that FDR only prolonged it, I am really prepared to entertain a suggestion for pulling up at least the electronic media draw bridge. Trade barriers we can consider next.
Regards — Cliff
1 comment:
Three comments.....and sorry....no third party validation. These are MY thoughts and not quotes of some other talking head whose right to speak are at least no less than mine.
That someone would sue for libel over a "bad review" is nothing new or unique, particularly in the US where our courts and airwaves are clogged with folks who will retaliate at the drop of a vowel because someone said something bad about them. The current two-party "system" disconnect is sustained because of this very philosophy. The Reps state their case about this or that, saying that the Dems are wrong, and the Dems fire back vehemently that the Reps are the party of "No." In other words, we've arrived at the point where it is axiomatic that a good defense is a good offense. Someone says something you don't like, take them out.
Interesting that Hillary has proclaimed that free internet is a basic human right. I assume that right is up there with good air, food, water, and of course, health care.
Smoot was a failed response because it struck at symptoms without addressing the problem. One doesn't need to impose tariffs if one's ability to produce those products at a fair and marketable price is healthy. Today, if the Chinese get angry enough, the store shelves in America would be quickly barren. And that is only ONE example of how badly we've painted ourselves into the corner. First develop the ability to sustain yourself, THEN put up the barriers...that is.....if you want to be an island.
NH is about to learn that lesson in brutal ways if it moves ahead with the long threatened border tools. And I am a NH dweller.
Post a Comment