British Chiropractic Association v Simon Singh

Jack of Kent said:
I do not think Sir David Eady is the real problem. Personal attacks on him do nothing to help the campaign for libel reform, and really should be avoided anyway. I can conceive of many other judges making each and every libel decision he has made.
Click to expand...
That may be true, but he is not just attacked for his actions, but for his opinions, and he has seen no evidence of the alleged libel tourism, even though he has personally presided over some of the high profile cases of this nature.
 
Lothian said:
More on Libel Law & Eady in the Guardian today.
Click to expand...


Here again, as in the Simon Singh case, we have Eady making seemingly perverse decisions - a view corroborated by the fact that other judges readily overturned his rulings on appeal.

I agree we need to concentrate on changing the libel law, but Eady is surely, for some unfathomable reason, exploiting that law.
 
"I've seen wild dogs that are better controlled. This :rule10 wouldn't even convince a homeopath for :rule10 sake!"

Go on, watch it! You know you want to....

Rolfe.
 
Last week I was using a spare desk in a colleague's office to correct exam papers, and a student from a more advanced group (whom I knew) came in to chat to the colleague about some stuff. He began talking about his personal life, something about a new girlfriend. I should mention that this student is Canadian. I occasionally heard the word "chiro" attached to the GF, and formed the impression that the GF was studying to become a chiropractor. I think I muttered "quackery" under my breath.

It's fortunate that an exclamation of "quackery" might have been perfectly appropriate to describe some of the wrong answers on the papers I was marking. Because actually, the student was talking about going to join his GF for a holiday - in Cairo.

Rolfe.

[/derail]
 
rjh01 said:
With that video, any relationship between the subtitles and what Hitler actually said is only a co-incidence.
Click to expand...

You don't say. :rolleyes:
Rolfe said:
"I've seen wild dogs that are better controlled. This :rule10 wouldn't even convince a homeopath for :rule10 sake!"

Go on, watch it! You know you want to....
Click to expand...

I'm sure it's quite funny, the problem, for me at any rate, is that this is the third or fourth set of subtitles I've seen for that clip, on varying topics, and the main joke is wearing a bit thin.
 
zooterkin said:
... the problem, for me at any rate, is that this is the third or fourth set of subtitles I've seen for that clip, on varying topics, and the main joke is wearing a bit thin.
Click to expand...

Expecting a set of subtitles along the lines of "but these guys on the internet keep making up stuff which doesn't bear any relationship to what I'm saying" any time now.
 
zooterkin said:
You don't say. :rolleyes:


I'm sure it's quite funny, the problem, for me at any rate, is that this is the third or fourth set of subtitles I've seen for that clip, on varying topics, and the main joke is wearing a bit thin.
Click to expand...

Ssshhh...need to speak quietly to avoid getting a slap for derailing, but I wonder what the first example was of the jokey subtitling of that scene.
 
Badly Shaved Monkey said:
Ssshhh...need to speak quietly to avoid getting a slap for derailing, but I wonder what the first example was of the jokey subtitling of that scene.
Click to expand...


The first one I saw was about Sheffield United's relegation from the premier league in 2007, but used a different clip.
 
Mojo said:
The first one I saw was about Sheffield United's relegation from the premier league in 2007, but used a different clip.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure the first one I saw was also football related, but I don't think it was anything to do with Sheffield.
 
Dara O'Brien

Dara O'Brien, the comedian, was on the BBC this morning talking about libel laws and his support for a campaign to have them changed. He spoke, briefly, about the Simon Singh case and made some good points about medical claims and efficacy. However the presenters were arguing that don't companies need to protect their image and protect their profits.

I don't think they got his point, at all.
 
LandR said:
Dara O'Brien, the comedian, was on the BBC this morning talking about libel laws and his support for a campaign to have them changed. He spoke, briefly, about the Simon Singh case and made some good points about medical claims and efficacy. However the presenters were arguing that don't companies need to protect their image and protect their profits.

I don't think they got his point, at all.
Click to expand...


yeah I saw this, why was he on again? He was doing something relevant to science and corporations or something.

And yes the interviewers were crap.
 
A message from Simon Singh:

"It has been 18 months since I was sued for libel after publishing my article on chiropractic. I am continuing to fight my case and am prepared to defend my article for another 18 months or more if necessary. The ongoing libel case has been distracting, draining and frustrating, but it has always been heartening to receive so much support, particularly from people who realise that English libel laws need to be reformed in order to allow robust discussion of matters of public interest. Over twenty thousand people signed the statement to Keep Libel Laws out of Science, but now we need you to sign up again and add your name to the new statement.

The new statement is necessary because the campaign for libel reform is stepping up a gear and will be working on much broader base. Sense About Science has joined forces with Index on Censorship and English PEN and their goal is to reach 100,000 or more signatories in order to help politicians appreciate the level of public support for libel reform. We have already met several leading figures from all three main parties and they have all showed signs of interest. Now, however, we need a final push in order to persuade them to commit to libel reform.

Finally, I would like to make three points. First, I will stress again - please take the time to reinforce your support for libel reform by signing up at www.libelreform.org. Second, please spread the word by blogging, twittering, Facebooking and emailing in order to encourage friends, family and colleagues to sign up. Third, for those supporters who live overseas, please also add your name to the petition and encourage others to do the same; unfortunately and embarrassingly, English libel laws impact writers in the rest of the world, but now you can help change those laws by showing your support for libel reform. While I fight in my own libel battle, I hope that you will fight the bigger battle of libel reform."
Click to expand...


I was surprised and dismayed that only 20,000 people signed the "Keep Libel Laws out of Science" statement. Hopefully this combined effort will prove to be a whole lot more successful.

BJ
 
BillyJoe said:
I was surprised and dismayed that only 20,000 people signed the "Keep Libel Laws out of Science" statement. Hopefully this combined effort will prove to be a whole lot more successful.

BJ
Click to expand...
I started to sign but then cancelled. Is it possible to sign the petition without sending a letter to your MP? I have already written to my MP on the subject and don't really want to sent a new generic letter?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom