We are almost through the 7 days of my LISK Blog being down. As you saw yesterday, Mysterymom7 does not want to tell me what it is about my blog that she would like me to remove, instead she makes a vague statement about it being illegal for me to blog about her. Any one who read my blog knows it was not about Mysterymom7. It was mainly about LISK.com, but because what happened on LISK.com ran over into Mysterymom7’s “Catching LISK” blog I also covered things written in that blog. Mysterymom7 even gave me her entire blog to look at. She gave it to me! I had every right to state my opinion on her blog, the LISK.com site and anyone who posted in both places. As I keep saying, I stand by my blog.
I had 2 more emails from Mysterymom7 yesterday. More threats of lawsuit, but still no word from her lawyer she said she contacted. Here is what she wrote me:
What is Internet defamation?
Defamation is a false statement of material fact that damages the reputation of the target. Internet Defamation presents a dilemma to courts who have to balance the damage to the reputation of one person against the Internet free speech rights of another.
Under basic defamation law principles, there are two types of defamation, libel and slander. Libel is a published defamatory statement. Under traditional defamation law principles, slander is spoken statements. With the advent of the Internet, the terms Internet defamation, Internet libel, and Internet slander are used interchangeably . However, in the true sense of the word, slander only applies to spoken statements and therefore there is no such thing as Internet slander. The terms is nonetheless used to refer to Internet defamation.
The following are types of Internet Defamation:
Statements that are defamatory on their face – Under Internet defamation law principles, these statements are obviously defamatory. This type of Internet defamation usually results in the largest awards in online defamation litigation.
Internet defamation through false innuendo – Individuals possessing necessary contextual knowledge can appreciate the defamatory nature of the statement.
Internet defamation through legal innuendo – These statements are not defamatory on their face, but is defamatory when viewed with extrinsic information.
This is the first one, it had 8 attachments to it, but I didn’t dare click on any of them. She should read over the last one on that list. But the other email she sent me is really the one that does her in and made me and everyone I showed it to laugh and laugh and laugh. The title of the email was:
USATODAY.com – Jury awards $11.3M over defamatory Internet posts
The email itself was just a link to a news article:
I didn’t click on the link, but I get what she is trying to do. She may not see these as threats, but when you put all her emails together, first telling me she has my real name and address and that in the wrong hands it could be twisted, and then all these emails about lawsuits, at the very least they are harassment. Much more so than any of my blogs.
So here we are, my identity being dangled out there to everyone, threats of a million dollar lawsuit, and yes more people coming out of the woodwork to talk to me about this. If I was the evil person Mysterymom7 and Dorothy claim I am, I could just out a couple of people who contacted me lately and it would throw these ladies heads for a loop. But I have not thrown anyone into this who has asked to be left out of this. And am doing my best to keep it that way.
Tomorrow is day seven. After that I am willing to bring my LISK blog to a proper end, and move on in this blog to write about other things. If you want to be left out of those future blogs, then just butt out. It’s really up to you.