Mantis, Sam, and anyone else:
Will Bullshido.com having a set of principles and criteria for declaring something Bullshido cause it to be legally liable for any damages?
Are there any legal issues you can foresee with official declarations of Bullshido that represent site opinion?
Any other legal issues you foresee, please let them be heard.
Well. its a standard practice for someone who sues for internet libel to also name the website as a defendant. However unlike individuals the Website is protected by caselaw like the Zaran v. AOL decision.
The larger question is to protect the site do we need a certain level of evidence before the site and or staff members declare an art or martial artist a fraud or a con. I myself favor the clear and convincing standard as a whole with each individual piece of evidence being more likely then not to be true unless its libelous itself, at which point we are back to a higher standard.
I think that from now on, there needs to be a clear delineation between what the SITE considers bullshido, and what members do.
I think that most members would bash arts like Wing Chun or Aikido for a lack of combat effectiveness and breeding “sissies”, but would we want to have to legally defend ourselves against a lawsuit filed by “Combat Aikido” because members on our website made a potentially libelous claim that their school would breed “Combat-minded pussies with nerd-bodied abilities”? I know I wouldn’t want to deal with that, legally.
The same thing with the recent JFS expose. It can be entirely in Anthony’s domain to highlight a personal investigation he did and draw his own conclusions? Is the site part of it? SHOULD the site be part of that? Personally, I’m not in favor of personal investigations being considered for sitewide views; multiple people should be involved for that.
You’re just mad cause I said Krav Maga sucks.
No, it would be a positive. In fact, I think a case could be made that if an individual did not follow the protocol, that person is on a frolic from anything associated with the site goals. Therefore try and distance oneself from the tortfeasor.
Absolutely, I think we would slip into the content provider world there, which opens us up to the liability through the shield (safe harbor?) that Sam mentioned.
As far as legal issues that are a potential for the site, I think they are “defamation” which we are discussing now, and negligence for injuries are the top two. If somebody dies because of out of control bullshit somewhere, sometime, I would expect problems, civil and criminal.
Krav Maga DOES suck in some areas. I probably wouldn’t study Krav anywhere else other than my school because our instructors modify the curriculum to incorporate BJJ rather than the “lava & broken glass” attitude that traditional KM emphasizes.
Don’t get me started on the costs of having to wear krav-only gear in classes. That’s like a $200 initial startup cost for training at a school with Krav for gloves, gear, and outfit. But anyhow…
But to be productive and non-derailing, what are your thoughts concerning a separation between “Bullshido.com bullshido” and “member of bullshido.com” bullshido. Do you think it’s worthwhile to have, like, a set of graphics or a list indicating what the site considers Bullshido vs. what gets posted in the forum itself?
Our position that anything that is in the forum is member generated opinion, and the site as a matter of course does not moderate heavily and does not generate the content on the forums.
Right now, the site stamp goes on the articles produced.
Goddamnit Steve, that’s not how you act when getting trolled!!! 
As for the subject matter.
I believe more than anything, that the JFS situation brought out more good than bad.
We are working on setting up a check list on Investigations. We are lucky that we have Mr. Mantis and Samuel on board. This includes images/graphics, etc…
I don’t know if this is relevant or not…
I was watching reruns of “Bullshit” (Penn and Teller’s show) the other day on Showtime and they said something interesting. They said that they called the show “Bullshit” because when they investigate things they can’t actually use the word “fraud” because of liability. Apparently it’s legal to call something “bullshit” but not “fraud”, as far as defamation/libel goes.
So that got me thinking that the fact that we use the term “bullshido” is good because it gets our point across without using legal words like “fraud” which could open us up to some liability, not unlike the ebudo guys.
I think a simple definition for bullshido would be “martial arts bullshit”. And I think that should be good enough for people to understand. At this point everything we say on here is strictly opinion and as far as I know protected by the 1st amendment, as long as we don’t get into using legal terms.
I agree with TNK. We should strongly stay away from legally loaded terms like fraud, and stick with opinionated classifications that avoid that kind of liability.
I think the main thing about it is that we have to report the facts. Here is what needs to happen, in my opinion. Bullshido needs to take a jump, a jump over and above the forums. We have more legal protection in that way. The forums can be the lightly moderated entity. Bullshido.com is best not producing any “content” on the forums. The content should go into a managed magazine and or archives of pertinent information. It should have a professional name and be a sophisticated product.
When the site produces content properly, if the fucking guy is a fraud, we’ll call him a fraud! But we’ve got to get our shit together.
Now, I’d like to share a post I asked the Mrs. Mantis to make regarding this subject:
Don’t be alarmed, but this is MRS. Mantis.
Mr. Mantis told me about the investigative projects you guys in Bullshido have been pursuing, and asked for my thoughts. As a lawyer and as a former newspaper reporter and editor, here they are.
I think it’s time Bullshido expanded its role. You have a wonderful forum, but I think that if Bullshido is going to engage in in-depth reporting, it needs to include an online magazine to protect itself. In a magazine, you guys can take the collective wisdom you’ve gathered in the forum and refine it into serious journalism about the martial arts. You could be like the “Consumer Reports” of the field.
Here’s why: If you’re going to pursue and disseminate serious, legitimate criticism, serious, legitimate praise, or even just objective information, you’re going to have a wider variety of defenses available to you if (God forbid) you find yourself on the receiving end of a summons. For instance, the “Fair Use” defense in copyright becomes almost a no-brainer when you’ve established yourself as members of the press. Plus, it’s easier for people who work for established media outlets (and that’s what you’d be) to require any libel plaintiff to prove any reputation-besmirching statement false. (If you’re not sure why this is important, think back to what would have been easier to prove to your mother when you were a kid - that your brother took the last cookie, or that you didn’t.)
Right now, the law views you as little more than a collection of folks who like to talk amongst yourselves about the martial arts. Become the publishers of an online magazine reaching out to the rest of the world, and you’ve got real First Amendment clout. Plus, if you do get into trouble, you’ll be able to call upon organizations like the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press for help. Right now, you can’t.
No, don’t give up the forum. Just establish another page branching off from your current homepage as the homepage for Bullshido, the Magazine.
Yes, it would be challenging. You’ll have to sell more ads to support the server space. You’d have to write stories the way reporters write stories; you’d have to interview people on the record, try to get all sides of an issue, and be very very picky about accuracy. You’d have to label critiques as “Criticism” or “Opinion.” You’d have to establish that thing called style, and by that I mean you’d have to decide such things as whether you want to spell out numbers and the names of states, or use abbreviations. I know this is touchy, but you’d also have to enlist an editor, because some of your English teachers failed some of you miserably.
You have a wonderful opportunity available to you. You already have a small army of highly-motivated people to write. If you play your cards right, you could establish one of the most accurate and most exciting martial arts publications out there. I’ll bet you wouldn’t let the master-of-the-week write a whole article filled with blather about how great he is! You’d get a Bullshido member who lives in the master’s community to go out as an official Bullshido correspondent to check out his school, talk to him and his students, talk to other area martial artists, and do a first-class job. And there would be photos! It could be great.
You’ve had my 50 cents. Thanks and good luck.
-Mrs. Mantis
Steve, you can’t get opinion coverage by mechanically throwing up buzzwords (“I think” or I feel" or “IMO”, etc.) Also, that is only for Ohio, as not every state may offer that protection.
This should be the statement we should operate from:
“The federal First Amendment does not provide any special protection for alleged statements of opinion.”
And to answer your question: Yes. Just think about it a little bit. Unless you were a comedian, who would publiclly state an opinion unsupported by fact? (Other than your average Bullshido member)
So in the absence of direct, material evidence, can Bullshido as a website make declarations of “Bullshido” against a school or instructor?
As in, we look at a website and pictures and see craziness and what-not, but have no video proof, no first-hand evidence, etc.
Well lets define our terms, and yes I’m cheating by using a dictionary:
direct is taken to mean evidence that does not arise through intervening or third party sources. i.e. Jim Jones told you that he likes to make his friends drink coolaid as verses his aunt sadie saying that Jim likes to invite his friends over to see the Hi-C man.
Often if the Bullshidoka controls the website upon which the material is posted then thats direct evidence. The presumption being that he wouldn’t allow information to be posted with which he disagreed.
Sometimes second party information is reliable. “Jim Jones told us to drink the coolaid and I ran for the hills, when I came back the next day, everyone was dead, and there was a big empty vat there.”
The evidence you do not want is what is called double hearsay. Vanna told Wendel that Jones used to make her drink coolaid so it must be true." Sometimes if its published we make exceptions but gossip general sucks.
Material? I think the more applicable word would be relevant. For example if I say David Bannon is a sucky morman that does not prove that he lied about stabbing lots of people. If I can prove he was a BYU when he said he was overseas slotting people then thats relevant. Let the prosecutors worry about materiality.
Bullshido can do what it want’s, but if there is no factual basis for a statement it could be actionable in defamation.
The website and everything found on it is reasonably reliable “fact.” However, I wouldn’t suggest doing an article based on a website alone. There is a chance it could be a “defamatory” site put up by another. Plus, it’s good to be through.
We should be able to back up every material statement.