Sandra Tanner and Utah Lighthouse Ministries lose lawsuit against FairLDS

[Grig]

A three-judge panel of the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of FairLDS, Scott Gordon, and Allen Wyatt and against Sandra Tanner and Utah Lighthouse Ministry.

This lawsuit was an effort to limit free speech by making an online parody websites legally actionable. The case was previously thrown out in summery judgment by the Tenth Circuit Court for the District of Utah, but Mrs. Tanner appealed.

You can read the full court ruling here:

http://www.ck10.uscourts.gov/opinions/07/07-4095.pdf

You can read a write-up from the Citizen Media Law Project on the judgment here:

http://tinyurl.com/58dvho

Here is the original District judge's ruling that was affirmed:

http://www.thelen.com/tlu/UtahLighthouseVDiscoveryComputing.pdf

[Old Mountain man]

My request is not tantamount to a lawsuit demanding your silence and you should have the intelligence to know that.

[ejonesie22]

YES...

LOL...

[svcw]

Cute but no cigar.
What has she said about ldsers that are mistruths, lies or distortions.

[ejonesie22]

A most outstanding endorsement and validation of their good work...

[greyfoxx39]

Popcorn placemarker.

[svcw]

Then that makes you ...what? Not a conservative...just wondering.

[Ol' Dan Tucker]

My request is not tantamount to a lawsuit demanding your silence and you should have the intelligence to know that.

I never said it was. I was merely asking you to reconcile your two opposing statements.

Anytime you post to a semi-public forum, such as this, you invite others to comment on what you've written.

Knowing this, why someone, such as yourself, who claims to support free speech, ask other poster not to respond to your posts?

Wouldn't it be easier to simply not post your opinions in the first place?

[svcw]

Oh this should be good. I am getting another cup of coffee for this.

[Osage Orange]

My request is not tantamount to a lawsuit demanding your silence and you should have the intelligence to know that.

"Requests"....along with lines like, "I am now formally requesting"......and then quoting law..is a THREAT.

Albeit, a toothless laughable threat, it was a threat nevertheless.

For you to continue to deny that...is par for the course.

[ejonesie22]

Dog hit is the one that yelps ping...

[roylene]

Do you think saying coffee is the same as throwing water on a witch? or wearing garlic to ward off vampires?

[svcw]

Oh thats just plain mean, yet I laughed.

[ejonesie22]

It is really funny since the law quoted does not apply to open forums where one CHOOSES to expose themselves to response...

[Ol' Dan Tucker]

"Requests"....along with lines like, "I am now formally requesting"......and then quoting law..is a THREAT.

This does seem a little out of the character for someone who claims to support free speech, doesn't it?

[Enosh]

Grumpy has pulled a flip-flop worthy of a presidential candidate. I’m so proud.

[Elsie]

Yes, free speech. It is a principle of conservatism. All true conservatives believe in it.

Unless you are a MORMON.

Then, if an OUTSIDER (or INsider; for that matter) 'SPEAKS' about the Temple Rites and ceremonies (none of which are 'scriptural') you folks get REALLY bent out of shape.

[Elsie]

So, free speech is of the Devil?

Huh?

I'll bet that as a child, your connect-the-dots pictures were quite a hoot!

[Elsie]

So, not only is Bush an enemy of free speech, but he also is an advocate of using the power of the federal government to suppress it.

SOMEone in these threads posted the FEDERAL LAW about COMPUTER HARRASSMENT but have said they were merely being informative about it.

[Elsie]

There should not be limits on freedom of speech where the only real consequence is minor irritation on the part of the speakee. Or even major irritation.

A classic!

[Elsie]

There you go again!