Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff
Well as everyone knows here, my original statement was opinion only and I made it clear that BT/Phorm needed to clarify the issue. I even updated the post to include and alternative interpretation yesterday evening and of course retracted the statement this morning before BT or Phorm had contacted me on the issue. So I fail to see how it can be classed as defamation given that at no point did I make a statement of fact, my statements were not malicious and I removed the statement under my own judgement and not as a result of any legal threats (which I had not received at that point), so I clearly made a genuine effort to prevent damage to Phorm and BT's reputations.
We will have to wait and see. I have no doubts that they will actually sue me and I will have to take that on the chin, although I fail to see what they plan to achieve given that I literally have no worth (no assets and no income).
I will make sure I keep you all updated.
Alexander Hanff
|
Now that made me laugh Alexander the fact phorms only reputation is in the murky past rootkit so nothing there to lose shame BT had to get burnt though mind if you play with fire you wil get burnt.
What I found interesting is the 21cn stuff....
Now what are Kents plans on that front since most will be other ISPs I intend to repl;y to Emma tonight then flurt a few emails off to a few larger independant ISPs who use BT backbone.
Think Kent was concerned that Google might be taking him to task over adverts.