[WikiEN-l] Saucy Sources, reliable and re : libel.

[geni]

On 15/11/2007, Alec Conroy <alecmconroy at gmail.com> wrote:
> >Are you willing to foot the legal bills?
>
> The odds of a successful libel claim are nonexistent if eight
> independent journalistic organizations have reported something as a
> fact.  Libel's just about impossible to prove anyway, and it
> definitely wouldn't apply here.   For one thing, truthfulness is
> always a defense to libel "The Guardian reported .... " is certainly a
> fact.

Wrong legal system. Di Stefano is in England/Scotland. Previous
reporting means nothing. Defending libel cases under UK law is tricky.


> Note also, if this were legitimate libel the place to start would be
> the deep pockets of the media organizations that are STILL publishing
> the statements about Mr. DI Stefano on their website.

Independent ran a piece in 2007


> That said, BLP isn't just about protecting us from legal disputes,
> it's also about making sure we do the right thing and accurately
> portray Di Stefano, regardless of whether we could ever get into
> problems for it.


BLP can't make up it's mind what it is for.

> So, my "Probably no legal concerns here" aside, I'm certainly not the
> foundations laywers, so as I said on the article talk page--  no hurry
> at all.   It's a minefield, go nice and slow, letting the laywers and
> foundation take the lead.  It'll all come out in the wash.
>


We are yet to see a statement from Mike Godwin and he isn't part of
Jimbo's working group.

-- 
geni