| Author |
Message |
    
monster
Supporter
Username: Monster
Post Number: 617
Registered: 7-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, March 5, 2005 - 12:22 pm: | 
|
The whole thing smells like rotten fish to me.
I am not the praying type, but I am the type to sorely wish the most ill wishes upon all of the low down rotten sumb¡tches who are involved in this bringing this lawsuit to not only MOL, but the school district.
I wish upon them the most vile of poxes, the nastiest of cancer's, and the worst case of sores and festering boils.
But that's just me.... |
Taylor M
Citizen
Username: Anotherusername
Post Number: 360
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, March 5, 2005 - 1:50 pm: |
|
A CHS senior over the age of 18? |
composerjohn
Citizen
Username: Composerjohn
Post Number: 162
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, March 5, 2005 - 2:29 pm: |
|
I turned 18 in October of my senior year of high school. It's possible.
I agree with most everyone in this post - the whole lawsuit smells rotten. |
Cathy
Supporter
Username: Clkelley
Post Number: 732
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, March 5, 2005 - 4:37 pm: |
|
Really though, as far as MOL goes, it doesn't matter what it smells like. It doesn't even matter what the kids in question did or didn't do.
What matters is that MOL is being sued for "receiving" and "distributing" documents that were public in the first place. #1, making message boards liable for what their members post is extremely dangerous. #2, if you can get sued for passing along public documents, then what the f*** else can you get sued for.This kind of lawsuit, if successful and repeated elsewhere, will fundamentally change the nature of the internet.
To me, that's what we're fighting for. The rest is just background noise. |
Cathy
Supporter
Username: Clkelley
Post Number: 733
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, March 5, 2005 - 4:50 pm: |
|
BTW as to the lawsuit against the BOE - I hold that in a totally different category thant he lawsuit against MOL. The students may legitimately feel that the BOE released confidential information about them. I don't know if they did or not - from what I know about it, they didn't - but that is at least a legitimate reason to sue them. It's up to the courts to decide if the BOE screwed up.
But the suit with respect to MOL is frightening. I'm no lawyer, but just using my common sense it seems to be a terrible attack on free speech. |
Taylor M
Citizen
Username: Anotherusername
Post Number: 365
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, March 6, 2005 - 2:32 am: |
|
composer-
I didn't want to come right out and say it; but I think I recall one of the kids being 19 when this happened. As Anon said, one of them was OVER the age of 18 when this happened.
I know students turn 18 in the Senior year, I did.
I'm waiting to see what they do about the Ledger and News Record's stories from last week. |
sac
Supporter
Username: Sac
Post Number: 1881
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, March 6, 2005 - 7:45 am: |
|
More than half of all "typical" students, who started Kindergarten at age 5, will turn 18 before the end of their Senior Year. (all the ones who have birthdays during the school year) So, it only takes being 'held back' one year (or having parents wait an extra year to start a fall baby or other "not yet ready child" in Kindergarten) for a student to be turning 19 at some point during the Senior Year. Nothing to raise hackles about! |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 89
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Monday, March 7, 2005 - 9:01 am: |
|
As I have obviously stirrer the pot and the overwhelming opinion is that the students were wrong I will not belabor my defense of them.
However I will say to Taylor that I think you need to relax a bit, take a deep breath and exhale. You couldnt be more wrong about character of the students involved.
|
lumpyhead
Citizen
Username: Lumpyhead
Post Number: 1168
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Monday, March 7, 2005 - 9:15 am: |
|
How about the character of their parents and their lawyer? How much are they suing for? |
Meandtheboys
Citizen
Username: Meandtheboys
Post Number: 283
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Monday, March 7, 2005 - 9:27 am: |
|
Hoops: Sounds as if you know these kids personally and are able to vouch for thier good character?
FWIW, I have serious doubts about any kid that hits a teacher, security guard or any other figure of authority.
|
Taylor M
Citizen
Username: Anotherusername
Post Number: 371
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Monday, March 7, 2005 - 9:58 am: |
|
Hey Hoops-
I didn't say anything about the character of the 'students.' YOU did! You said because they graduated and went to college it showed they wre 'good kids.' I merely pointed out just because someone graduates high school and goes to 'college' does not make them a 'good kid.'
And Eric pointed out more extreme examples then I did!!!
"S does not alway equal P." Just as P' does not always equal S." I know plenty of people who did not go to college. Does this mean they weren't a 'good kid?' I also know more then a few people who didn't graduate high school. So What?!
Good kids whatever. Seems I remember hearing one of them was CONVICTED!!! Hmmmm. Now there are innocent people who are wrongly convicted, but this individual first PLEAD GUILTY!!! Things that make you go 'HMMMMM' again.
I wasn't there when the incident took place, but I do know students who were. And all of them have said the kids were wrong.
Since you seem to be friends with these young adults, maybe you could talk to them about reconsidering their suit againt MOL.
(These are my comments and thought alone. NOT Dave or Jamie's)
|
Cathy
Supporter
Username: Clkelley
Post Number: 744
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Monday, March 7, 2005 - 12:47 pm: |
|
I said it above & I'll say it again - it doesn't matter if they were good kids or not. What matters is whether the BOE released educational records that should have been private. That would be a violation of FERPA (Family Educational Rights & Privacy Act). From what I know of the case, and with the caveat that I'm not a lawyer or an expert on FERPA, it doesn't seem to me that FERPA was violated. But that's for the courts to decide and Hoops is right that that part of the case is at least legit.
FERPA could equally have been violated if they had posted the GPA of straight-A students, if those straight-A students didn't want their grades released in this manner. It matters not at all whether the students were guilty, innocent, good, bad, whatever.
The case against MOL is entirely separate, and involves other issues (at least as far as I can see). |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 7834
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, March 7, 2005 - 6:13 pm: |
|
I doubt that the young adults involved in the incident are the reincarnations of Bonnie and Clyde, to be quite honest.
However, being disciplined by the principal doesn't justify a physical attack on said person. This should be fairly obvious to just about everyone. As I have stated before they were treated quite leniently and because of their suit other miscreates may well not enjoy the same level of leniency in the future.
I wish them well at Kean.
Cathy, my recollection is that the only posting about grades was one by their supporters who indicated at least one of them was an "honor student".
|
Cathy
Supporter
Username: Clkelley
Post Number: 750
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Monday, March 7, 2005 - 6:16 pm: |
|
Right, which is why I don't think there is a FERPA issue here. Yet the suit seems to be about FERPA from the parts that D & J posted. The names of the students were also never mentioned (that I know about anyway). I'm not sure if there are other confidentiality issues besides those specified in FERPA that might be at stake.
In any case, the lawsuit seems to be about releasing confidential information rather than about whether the students were "innocent" or "guilty." |
Taylor M
Citizen
Username: Anotherusername
Post Number: 380
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 8, 2005 - 8:45 pm: |
|
Cathy-
Who exactly are they accusing of releasing this information? Like you, I don't recall their names being mentioned either.
Also, why aren't the newspapers being sued? They printed the stories.
IF someone in fact did release confidential information and it can be proven beyond a doubt who leaked it, then that person should be held accountable.
But, don't newspapers print confidential leaks all the time? |
Cathy
Supporter
Username: Clkelley
Post Number: 765
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 8, 2005 - 10:43 pm: |
|
From what I read of the suit they are accusing the BOE of releasing confidential information. I don't think the BOE did this, as student names were not mentioned. But the courts can decide pretty quickly if FERPA or something else was violated, I should think.
Newspapers print confidential stuff all the time, sure. But if an official of an educational institution does the leaking, s/he is quite liable for this. Everybody who works in education at any level knows this, but it is especially (painfully) well-known to admin types. I don't know if the newspaper is equally liable.
Certainly a message board should not be liable for information posted by its members. Especially when the information is a public document mailed to a large percentage of the community and posted on an official website. I would think it more likely that there would be copyright issues with reprinting stuff without permission - but again, the correct course of action here would be to ask the message board operator to "cease and desist" in their copyright infringement and take it down. It's only if they don't that they're liable. According to DAve, this never happened. And in any case I don't see anything in the lawsuit about copyright issues - after all it's the BOE's copyrighted material, not the plaintiffs'.
This is all as I understand it, not being a lawyer or an expert on these things. I know a little bit about it because my job sometimes involves such issues. |
D.
Moderator
Username: Dave
Post Number: 5518
Registered: 4-1998
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 8, 2005 - 10:53 pm: |
|
People have every right to post a document and discuss it under the Fair Use section of copyright law.
quote:Sec. 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include -
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
Taken from:
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.text.html
|
Taylor M
Citizen
Username: Anotherusername
Post Number: 383
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 9, 2005 - 12:08 am: |
|
Cathy-
I read the same info about the lawsuit. I thought maybe you might know more. And like you, I don't remember names being released either. But if one of the students was over 18, as someone mentioned, releasing their name for being involved in the cafe brawl would be allowed, wouldn't it? (but not the school record).
I agree the Courts will decide who is really correct. When it's determined the school did nothing wrong (and I believe this is will happen) I hope those named in the suit go after Dennis and the students.
It's so unfair MOL is being dragged into this. I thought reposting something from a public board, was ok. Didn't realized it would be a copyrite problem. Unless it stated do not copy.
|
Taylor M
Citizen
Username: Anotherusername
Post Number: 384
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 9, 2005 - 12:09 am: |
|
Thanks Dave. |
Cathy
Supporter
Username: Clkelley
Post Number: 767
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 9, 2005 - 11:57 am: |
|
Dave is right about fair use of course, and I agree entirely that the re-posting of the BOE letter is fair use of that material. It's just that I could at least wrap my head around the idea that somebody might think it isn't, and therefore sue. I think they'd lose if they did however, given that the letter was a public document (factor 2) and there is probably no market value to it (factor 4).
Posting any old thing for comment isn't necessarily fair use though. If somebody copied out and posted a chapter from a book, and that posting could negatively affect sales of the book, I could see the publisher knocking on Dave's door and asking him to take it down. I also believe that in such circumstances Dave probably would take it down if asked. |
Dave
Citizen
Username: Dave
Post Number: 5602
Registered: 4-1998
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 15, 2005 - 1:01 pm: |
|
Copyright is not an issue. The author of the material is not the plaintiff. |
Cathy
Supporter
Username: Clkelley
Post Number: 821
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 15, 2005 - 1:36 pm: |
|
Yes, I think I said this. We agree with each other, Dave. 
Good luck - keep everyone posted on how it's going. It is very much on my mind, and I'm sure everyone feels the same. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page