Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:29, 15 January 2007

Gunns 20 - Australian SLAPP

Gunns 20 - Misplaced Pages : Gunns Limited, a Timber and woodchip product company in Australia is sueing 17 individual activists, including Federal Greens Senator Bob Brown, as well as three not-for-profit environmental groups, for over 7.8 million dollars. Gunns claims that the defendants have sullied their reputation and caused them to lose profits, the defendants claim that they are simply protecting the environment. The defendants have become collectively known as the Gunns 20. It is widely believed that this move is intended to tie up these activists in court proceedings, during which time Gunns intend to build a Pulp Mill in northern Tasmania. The move is possibly also intended to scare off other activists... w:Gunns 20 --ErnMalley 16:58, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

--

would the lengthy UK MacDonalds libel case be one of these? -- Tarquin

Absolutely. Industry Vs Activists. Very important SLAPP suit although I don't believe it is called such in Britain. Ilena 02:35, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I am not sure how the Scientology cases warrant mention but no others do. Having examples of several organizations handing out SLAPPs would make much better for POV than reference to a single organization, especially one as controversial as scientology. --67.134.44.82 17:15, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

No, all their actions should be listed, but perhaps in their own special section.

Removed external links

I removed a few external links, which seemed to be part of an agenda-pushing, book-selling campaign across wikipedia. It seems like there are already a fair amount of external links for the California case, anyway.

• Varian SLAPP The "quintessential SLAPP."
• Be Careful Who You SLAPP — The book about Internet SLAPPs.

kmccoy (talk) 08:58, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'd love to see further explanation what separates SLAPP from a justified lawsuit. Who determines, how?

Think of the SLAPP as a kind of special version of the demurrer. Anyway, if a judge really screws up and grants an anti-SLAPP dismissal they shouldn't have (that is, the lawsuit was legitimate and not merely to harass), then the plaintiff can always appeal and get the dismissal vacated and the case remanded for further proceedings. --Coolcaesar 04:25, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

POV-check

This page seems to be entirely based on one website. That is giving it a large bias IMO. Ansell 08:34, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

The bias seems not to be significant. The article just factually discusses the matter; while it has nothing positive about SLAPP, it as well has nothing negative. The overall picture is caused by the subject itself, not the article, so I think POV check template is not needed. However, I'll watch it in case there are objections or suggestions. CP/M |Misplaced Pages Neutrality Project| 09:15, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

"Examples of SLAPPs"

Purpose of a SLAPP lawsuit is - by definition - not (necessarily) to win, but to harass the defendant. Cattle industry v. Oprah Winfrey is not a good example of SLAPP: Oprah is not a "less powerful critic" (in fact, it would be hard to find a more powerful person on US television), nor she can be "severely burdened" by the cost of legal defense. GregorB 22:19, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

From what I have read about Ms Winfrey and this suit, it was a classic SLAPP suit, intended to silence a strong critic. Her comment was quite offhand on her TV show. I believe it should be included. Good evening all. Ilena 01:58, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

This is an important category. I'm going to suggest a few other good examples.

Barrett Vs Rosenthal ==

Classic internet SLAPP suit just decided in November, 2006 for the third of three plaintiffs. Industry vs Activist. Ilena 01:58, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Don't have all the details at hand. The environmentalist writer, Peter Montague. SLAPPED Here's the outcome, Monsanto's Gaffey VS Montague Ilena 02:25, 14 January 2007 (UTC)