Mumsnet ordered to give users' real life IDs and messages to plastic surgeon they criticised

Re: "Penis Beaker"

The Oxo tower?

Re: Errm ...

"One should be able to compare notes with others online on medical procedures without fearing libel charges."

And indeed you can, provided it's based on fact and not hearsay or lies. I've not read what they have said, so no idea if they are telling the truth or not.

Re: El'reg can we still post here as

El Reg Knows Who You Are. Even if you've ticked the anonymous box.

@cynic_999

In the event that you had posted something along those lines then the receipients would consider what they know about both of us and make their own minds up. Given that this is your second post bad mouthing me then I would suggest that what credibility you had is now gone and you would be out the door.

This is very much the problem with applying libel law to the internet, simply because the internet forums are not a professional organisation with credibility and prestige such that people would believe them out of hand. Mumsnet is the informal discussion of posters who consider themselves mothers, not by definition professionals of any kind.

I am presuming that the posters did not use their real names hence the legal action and so you have a couple of anonymous posters who said something that the good doctor didn't like. The chances are the posters are beyond the reach of the local courts and so by pushing for a legal gagging, the doctor is giving crediant to the posts and I would say doing more harm than good.

Just looking at this forum I would say the majority want to side against the doctor, simply because of the heavy handed approach taken.

I understand that this is said doctors professional reputation but all the same the statistics for the people he has helped should be enough to show who is at fault.

Personally when I hear of internet gagging I immediately assume they have something to hide and are using the legal system to hide their guilt

Re: Messages

"I've just sent some anonymous private e-mails to a couple of your co-workers telling them that you have been slagging them off behind their back and spitting in their coffee."

Since you've admitted guilt, there's no need to dive into your private emails.

But no plaintiff shouldn't be entitled to every piece of private communication between the parties -- only that which is germane. Suppose, for example, one of them is suicidal and has been talking it over with the other. (Or that one of them has been having an affair. Or that the conversations contain any intimate details.)

I would appeal the decision using the ECHR right to privacy. This is disproportionate.

Re: Messages

1. there is a qualitative and quantitative difference betw a PRIVATE chat betw two consenting parties WHO HAVE EVERY EXPECTATION THAT CONVERSATION WILL REMAIN PRIVATE FOREVER; and broadcasting a not-really-very-private-email-now-is-it to a bunch of people, apparently with malice aforethought...

2. there are ANY number of PRIVATE matters they may discuss in those emails/chats which have nothing to do with the doctor, OR MAY be related ('oh, that scar where they took out my belly fat is more prominent than i thought...' blah blah blah), personal stuff which may not seem like a big deal, but is fucking personal...

for example, i realize probably everyone knows i pick boogers (in the privacy of my bathroom), but i really don't want pictures or email descriptions cropping up for no good reason than someone else's nosiness... i would be mortified and violated, EVEN THOUGH it is only about stupid boogers...

3. i don't care what kind of super-duper-excellent reputation der gut herr doktor has, is it possible he is meta-physically the world's greatest plastic surgeon in his specialty, AND he mucked up a few operations ? ? ? duh...

4. lastly, the retarded notion that LAYPEOPLE MUST discuss any/all medical issues (heh, why stop there: NO discussion of legal issues unless 100% accurate; NO discussion of science unless you have the calcs nailed down 100% accurately, ad absurdum...) with 100% accuracy and total knowledge is preposterous on the face of it...

FORGET about any actual malice or intent to defame a doctor, JUST NORMAL ignorance of most medical 'stuff' is enough to explain inaccurate and 'wrong' medical information laypeople relate to each other...

this is crazy talk...

Re:At which point RIPA could be used

Only if you are in the UK.

Re: Dr Jesper Sorensen

Public/Private key encryption. You might not actually be able to decode it, only the intended recipient(s) can, how often do you add yourself to the CC list in an email you're sending?

@ m0rt

For words of this sort, the prefix "A" means "without; e.g., amoral means without morals, asexual means without sex, etc.

Anonymous means without name (or without identity); removing the "a" indicates his name or identity is provided (although so far as I can tell there is no actual word as nonymous). OP means that he usually identifies his posts with his handle, except under specific circumstances.