Bickering and finger pointing...

[Guest blue72beetle]

Not trying to drag this on, but I have a genuine question.

I don't understand how this forum or organization could be drug into a legal suit having anything to do by a deal between members. I'm a member of many many forums, and this is the only one that refuses to have a member/vendor feedback policy. Wouldn't a blanket statement when signing up, or in such related buy/sell forum, stating "AACA assumes no liability...etc" cover any mis-deeds?

A bad deal between two members is just that. A bad deal between two members. AACA didn't force anyone to buy or sell.

[zoltanb]

I am relatively new here but I would just like to see the sales pitches regulated to the sales side and keep the forum for discussion. not a cult of personality. Just my 2 cents worth.

[trimacar]

AACA is a much larger organization than most car clubs, with members in the 10's of thousands. And, there are many dollars attached to that large number of members, it caters to the collector, but it's a business too.

As such, it is subject to any sort of nuisance litigation.

A post on an AACA sanctioned forum, being negative, could easily be considered libel.

A company won't go against a small, minor, organization's forum, for negative comments, but if you figure the potential damage against an organization with the number of members of the AACA, the damages could be construed as major.

A vendor has an annual revenue of X dollars. A very negative comment is posted, and their revenue the next year is 1/2 of X dollars. They could sue, and, in today's wonderful litigious society, possibly win. But, win or lose, the organization has to foot the bill for lawyers and such.

Thus, as I stated earlier, the concept of free speech does NOT apply to a forum that is connected to an organization such as this......

[Guest Mc_Reatta]

Would hope the AACA has a means of staying current on all the legal issues concerning such an organization.

The topic here seems to be Internet Defamation Law. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act clearly grants immunity from liability for defamation for websites like this forum that are considered distributors of information not publishers.

That being said, they still should not encourage or elicit comments or opinions from posters that might be defamatory, nor allow defamatory posts to remain on the site lest they might lose the protection that section of the act grants.

Thus the club has generated rules of conduct for the forums and appointed moderators to enforce them. They have the job of trying to balance the club from possibly being sued for defamation and still allow free exchange of opinions and information. Not an easy task at times, and they earn every penny they are paid , and deserve our respect for their service.

I imagine when they review posts on the forum with an eye towards possibly subjecting the club to litigation, they know that there is very little chance of liability from posts where poster X calls poster Y a scallywag for a statement or opinion they have made. However, when a negative comment is made against a "vendor" the risk of litigation rises substantially since there are financial losses that come into play which are easily provable and more likely to be brought to the legal system for resolution involving the club in a lawsuit whether they have any liability or not.

So it is not out of protecting the "vendors" that they do things the way they do, but protecting the club. It just seems that it might be taken that way to an outsider. The real protection in a defamation lawsuit is if the stated allegations are true. Our moderators cannot know if an allegation is true or not. Even less so if the allegation is relayed second or third hand. Thus the best decision is to remove any allegation that could be deemed defamatory rather than let it stand on the forum. We can't expect them to investigate allegations and get in the middle of them to make any determinations as to their validity. Heck, the club would have to double their salaries or more! :eek:

Leave that to the publishers like Hemmings who are liable for defamation for what is printed in their publication, and who charge vendors for the use of that publication for advertising and can therefor afford to investigate and mediate allegations and disputes which the AACA cannot be expected to undertake as a club. Granted this gives the vendors the benefit of the doubt, but that's unfortunately the nature of the beast, and I don't see how it would be in the best interest of the club or this forum to do it otherwise.

May the gift of gratitude enter the hearts of all the forum members this holiday season and may we learn from this discussion to keep our posts civil as well as informational and appreciate the great benefit this forum brings to us and respect its limitations now that some of the reasons for their existence have been revealed.

[Guest Double M]

"The topic here seems to be Internet Defamation Law. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act clearly grants immunity from liability for defamation for websites like this forum that are considered distributors of information not publishers. "

Bravo!

The AACA is not legally libel for negative posts. Period.

End of story.

You may now continue with your regularly scheduled programing...

[NCReatta]

"The topic here seems to be Internet Defamation Law. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act clearly grants immunity from liability for defamation for websites like this forum that are considered distributors of information not publishers. "

Bravo!

The AACA is not legally libel for negative posts. Period.

End of story.

You may now continue with your regularly scheduled programing...

BUT they still could get sued and have to pay for lawyers, court fees, etc. Even if they do win.

This is an automotive forum. It is not a complaint department. What good is it going to do to complain about it here? Is the Reatta club going to go hunt them down based on one person's story that may or my not be legit? Would the AACA do the same? I think not.

Again, this is an automotive forum. We talk CARS here. in the Buy/Sell section, vendors sell parts, buyers buy the parts. Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything.

If you have a problem with a vendor, take it up either with the vendor himself, or with Hemmings, eBay, Google, whatever. This IS NOT the place.

And remember, there are ALWAYS two sides to any story.

Summary: Stay on subject. Vendors can sell their stuff, buyers can buy their stuff and give recommendations about vendors. But this IS NOT the place for trash talk. First hand, second hand, thirteenth hand, whatever. If you've got a problem, take it somewhere else. It will do NO GOOD here.

My 2 cents.

Edited December 8, 2011 by NCReatta (see edit history)

[Guest Kingsley]

McReatta - thanks and it is very well put. In line with my philosphy, I would certainly hope that no fraudulent allegations are even attempted to be put on any AACA Forum.

Peter G. has made it abundantly clear how these matters should be handled. One problem lies in the fact that there are an awful lot of Reatta owners, who have most valid complaints, are not aware of the existence of the AACA forums and thus turn to others to fight for their redress for certain fraudulent and illegal actions they have been subjected to.

In the future, they will be directed to Moderators and as I mentioned in an earlier post, one of the Moderators very successfully intervened recently, and one several years ago, when a party ultimately was directed to them and eventually justice was served.

I am sure that all participants in the many Forums are indeed greatful for the opportunities afforded by the AACA through your efforts and guidance.

[Ronnie]

BUT they still could get sued and have to pay for lawyers, court fees, etc. Even if they do win.

I agree. I consider my website as a repository of information about the Buick Reatta and I do not consider myself a publisher. I have stated many times that I don't consider myself an expert on Reattas. The goal of my website is to make the information provided by this forum, and other sources, easy to find when it is needed. However, even considering what Mc_Reatta just pointed out about section 230, I can tell you that liability weighs heavily on my mind. There is not a day that goes by that I don't worry about liability issues involved with operating ReattaOwner.com. The old adage that "anyone can sue anyone for anything" is always in the back of my mind and is always considered in any decision I make concerning the website. Because of that very reason I am currently looking at every tutorial on my website to evaluate what liability risk it might pose and whether or not it should be removed from the website. I have already identified a few that might need to be removed but so far I haven't done so.

I have a small, rarely used, forum on ReattaOwner.com and regardless of what section 230 says I would not tolerate any remarks that might possibly defame a vendor or anyone else due to the possibility of a law suit.

I do favor some type of vendor rating system so buyers could rate a seller. When I brought that up on this forum it was rejected before I even had a chance to explain it properly. Now that Peter has stepped in and made his wishes known about this matter, I stand behind him as the final say on this forum and respect him for the hard work he has done. I think everyone else should do the same.

Edited December 8, 2011 by Ronnie (see edit history)

[West Peterson]

"The topic here seems to be Internet Defamation Law. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act clearly grants immunity from liability for defamation for websites like this forum that are considered distributors of information not publishers. "

Bravo!

The AACA is not legally libel for negative posts. Period.

End of story.

You didn't understand a word of what Mc_Reatta said. I can tell you didn't because of your asinine response. First, the AACA is responsible for having to legally defend itself if someone sues them. Second, it is the AACA's wishes that this forum is used for social communication to promote the old car hobby. It has been stated time and time again that if you have a problem with a vendor, it needs to be handled through Private Messaging. And that, my friend, is PERIOD. End of story.

[zoltanb]

Thank God !!! LOCK THIS UP

[Booreatta]

I try to stay out of these posts but I just have one quick comment then I'm done. Its a simple question for those folks who are on the discussion group and are not members of the AACA, what right do you think you have in telling the AACA how to run their web site? They dont come into your house and tell you how to run you household. Solve the problem and join the AACA then and only then do you have the right. Ok now i'm done

Chuck Kerls

Proud member of the AACA

booreatta@cox.net

[trimacar]

Chuck, well put.

OK, to talk cars now, you Reatta owners are, obviously, passionate.

Anyone in the Winchester Va. area have a Reatta to show me? I see pictures, but honestly don't know that I've ever seen one in the flesh, uh, metal.............