Sky Blues Trust Guardian link (6 Viewers)
- Thread starter Broken Hearted Sky Blue
- Start date
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Thank you for your support, I'm actually a fan of Tony Livsey who used to edit the Daily Sport.
So why do you think Sisu are considering legal action over a factual piece except because of wider exposure?
Last edited:
You know all this proves that they have learned Fuck all..
It all started with the same reaction to what ,a group of around 30 people Taking a few banners Into the Ground and Overreacting ,look what happened from there ,this Is history repeating Itself ,THey are Clueless.
It all started with the same reaction to what ,a group of around 30 people Taking a few banners Into the Ground and Overreacting ,look what happened from there ,this Is history repeating Itself ,THey are Clueless.
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
He only cares about "Steven and the boys" so it wont bother him.
If Pressley ever gets the sack I think RFC will need to be put on suicide watch.
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
The owners are doing a great job get down to Sixfields support Steven and the lads:claping hands::facepalm:
Supporters Direct also have a link to the Guardian article and it's still there....
http://www.supporters-direct.org/ne...acl-make-new-rent-offer-no-response-from-sisu
Don't understand why SBT have removed their reference.
http://www.supporters-direct.org/ne...acl-make-new-rent-offer-no-response-from-sisu
Don't understand why SBT have removed their reference.
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Perhaps by fans he only means the sixfields super fans?
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Wasn't it the lovely Ray R who said something about Sisu not liking negative publicity after that incident and that they might leave if it continued? I'm on my phone so can't check it.
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Maybe SD haven't had a legal threat yet from the lawyers.
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
http://www.supporters-direct.org/news-article/coventry-city-legal-threats-to-supporters-trust-issued
COVENTRY CITY – LEGAL THREATS TO SUPPORTERS’ TRUST ISSUED
Legal letters are being used as a new tactic in SISU Capital’s battle to secure ownership of the Ricoh Arena.
It can only be assumed that they have issued some form of communication to the Guardian already over Sports Journalist of the Year David Conn’s excellent summation of SISU’s disastrous seven-year reign, as today the supporters’ trust were warned by lawyers acting for Hedge Fund SISU Capital that they could end up being sued….after posting a link to the story!
Given the wide distribution of said link across the internet – through Facebook, Twitter, on individual blogs and sites, we presume that the letter has been received by all those who have ‘published’ the story. Indeed, this week Two Hundred Percent and Stand for Football have both put up articles, linking to Conn’s original piece.
However the story is we understand entirely factually correct, including most certainly the non-payment of rent by SISU that led to SISU filing for the administration of Coventry City FC (a fact repeated over and over during and since the months that SISU were not, er, paying rent). We’re not quite sure where the now infamous – and unsuccessful – hedge fund have a case, and we’d be interested to hear of anyone who thinks they have. Especially given David Conn’s incredible track record in exposing football’s failures and poor practice.
Joy Seppala, Tim Fisher and the returning Mark Labovitch – an ex-investment banker and former financial advisor to ex-PM Tony Blair – are the three who appear to be making all the decisions, though this one should probably be filed with the rather large pile marked ‘misguided’.
- See more at: http://www.supporters-direct.org/news-article/coventry-city-legal-threats-to-supporters-trust-issued#sthash.pjE5woXu.dpuf
COVENTRY CITY – LEGAL THREATS TO SUPPORTERS’ TRUST ISSUED
Legal letters are being used as a new tactic in SISU Capital’s battle to secure ownership of the Ricoh Arena.
It can only be assumed that they have issued some form of communication to the Guardian already over Sports Journalist of the Year David Conn’s excellent summation of SISU’s disastrous seven-year reign, as today the supporters’ trust were warned by lawyers acting for Hedge Fund SISU Capital that they could end up being sued….after posting a link to the story!
Given the wide distribution of said link across the internet – through Facebook, Twitter, on individual blogs and sites, we presume that the letter has been received by all those who have ‘published’ the story. Indeed, this week Two Hundred Percent and Stand for Football have both put up articles, linking to Conn’s original piece.
However the story is we understand entirely factually correct, including most certainly the non-payment of rent by SISU that led to SISU filing for the administration of Coventry City FC (a fact repeated over and over during and since the months that SISU were not, er, paying rent). We’re not quite sure where the now infamous – and unsuccessful – hedge fund have a case, and we’d be interested to hear of anyone who thinks they have. Especially given David Conn’s incredible track record in exposing football’s failures and poor practice.
Joy Seppala, Tim Fisher and the returning Mark Labovitch – an ex-investment banker and former financial advisor to ex-PM Tony Blair – are the three who appear to be making all the decisions, though this one should probably be filed with the rather large pile marked ‘misguided’.
- See more at: http://www.supporters-direct.org/news-article/coventry-city-legal-threats-to-supporters-trust-issued#sthash.pjE5woXu.dpuf
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Thinking outside the box, there's a very good reason why you would remove the reference...
Harry Krishner
Well-Known Member
Yet another opportunity for SISU to publicly prove what a bunch of vindictive arseholes they are. Let them. The more bad publicity the better.
Get that link back up, SBT! Here it is:
http://www.theguardian.com/football...entry-city-owners-northampton-league-one-sisu
Get that link back up, SBT! Here it is:
http://www.theguardian.com/football...entry-city-owners-northampton-league-one-sisu
James Smith
Well-Known Member
The letter may say something like don't be posting this letter on your website.
Nick
Administrator
Why not though? It's just showing what's been said and using facts.
James Smith
Well-Known Member
I was thinking along the lines of super injunctions where you can't even mention there is a super injunction. However thinking about it, as the trust have told everyone the reason for removing the link that restriction obviously wasn't in the letter - so maybe there wasn't a no posting clauses. Someone from the Trust will no doubt be able to confirm or deny this.
Also there's a line in Batman (the original Tim Burton one) where the cop Eckhart says to the reporter Knox "Don't be writing this stuff in your newspaper Knox"
Last edited:
SkyblueBazza
Well-Known Member
Well according to ML there is a desire to be straight about things - so over to you ML/SISU/Otium or whatever guise you care (other than in the name of CCFC which offends me & many others...& who knows may even lead to legal action against you if someone has the money & balls to do it!)...tell us what specifically you dispute about the article. Tell us why specifically you picked on the SBT & not this forum or other sites citing the link...or have you sent similar letters to them too?
TurkeyTrot
New Member
They have threatened to sue. (Not only that but to sue the trust equal in blame as the Guardian) for "encouraging" people to click the link to the Guardian story.
Don't know if they've made threats to others.
No... They might sue you for receiving a service and not paying for it....
Astute
Well-Known Member
Bit of a difference between money awarded and a legal bill though. Even SUESUE wouldn't be able to get away with not paying the other sides solicitors and damages against someone bigger than themselves.
I've re- read the article and can't see anything defamatory or Libelous ,but then i'm no lawyer .I hope the Trust have'nt been duped here and are just getting Bullied around.
Philosoraptor
Well-Known Member
Well lets see how far this goes with The Guardian defending free speech. You can contact the Author of this article about this latest development at the Sky Blue Trust- which I believe is a news story in itself at;
https://twitter.com/david_conn
[email protected]
Sports desk: [email protected]
Tel. Nr: 020 3353 2000
https://twitter.com/david_conn
[email protected]
Sports desk: [email protected]
Tel. Nr: 020 3353 2000
Last edited:
Hobo
Well-Known Member
Many months ago I put a reply beneath CET article on the telegraph web site. It was very critical of SISU's management of the club, it had about 30 likes in about 15 minutes. No abuse, no derogatory remarks, in fact most of it was based on information SISU had made public themselves.
Lots of other replies were abusive and emotional. They soon got blocked and to my surprise so did mine. It soon became apparent the CET had received some sort of threat of legal action. I couldn't work out how they had grounds to object to my post. After about 5 days my post was unblocked and there to see unlike some of the others.
The trouble was the news had now moved on and people wouldn't read the post now anyway. One of many ways to control the media against you I guess.
Lots of other replies were abusive and emotional. They soon got blocked and to my surprise so did mine. It soon became apparent the CET had received some sort of threat of legal action. I couldn't work out how they had grounds to object to my post. After about 5 days my post was unblocked and there to see unlike some of the others.
The trouble was the news had now moved on and people wouldn't read the post now anyway. One of many ways to control the media against you I guess.
Sky Blues
Active Member
I've just been doing a little research and from what I have found it appears to me that the law on the issue of hyperlinking is very much up for debate. So far, the most recent case law I have been able to find suggests to me (and I'm not a lawyer so don't take my word for it) that anyone wishing to sue for hyperlinking to an external site will be testing the boundaries of the law of defamation. Therefore, it seems to me that were any such case to come to court, this point of law could be subject to a long and expensive legal battle with neither side guaranteed victory.
The case law I have found comes from the case of McGrath v Dawkins and others, which was heard in 2011. In the relevant extract of his judgement in March 2012, Judge Moloney said:
"The law on liability for hyperlinks is in a state of some uncertainty at present. Even if the general English rule were to be as recently held in Canada, that a mere hyperlink does not render the operator of the linking website liable for the content of the linked site, the decision may well be a fact-sensitive one, especially when, as here, the two websites are very closely associated, the link is hidden, and the point of contact is the "Home" button which is normally regarded as taking you to the central hub of the same website you are already on. I therefore conclude that I am not satisfied at this stage that the 2nd Defendant was not answerable for the .net forum at the material time, and that it is a question fit for trial. This part of the 2nd Defendant's application fails."
The case law I have found comes from the case of McGrath v Dawkins and others, which was heard in 2011. In the relevant extract of his judgement in March 2012, Judge Moloney said:
"The law on liability for hyperlinks is in a state of some uncertainty at present. Even if the general English rule were to be as recently held in Canada, that a mere hyperlink does not render the operator of the linking website liable for the content of the linked site, the decision may well be a fact-sensitive one, especially when, as here, the two websites are very closely associated, the link is hidden, and the point of contact is the "Home" button which is normally regarded as taking you to the central hub of the same website you are already on. I therefore conclude that I am not satisfied at this stage that the 2nd Defendant was not answerable for the .net forum at the material time, and that it is a question fit for trial. This part of the 2nd Defendant's application fails."
It is why I see this news perversely as being good news. It seems further evidence that SISU are getting increasingly desperate. They seem to be behaving like a cornered animal, lashing out in all directions. If they were truly confident about their position would they be threatening the Sky Blue Trust over a link to an article that is already in the public domain. Any sane and sensible organisation would have simply ignored this, instead they have given it fresh legs, and provided further ammunition to their critics, and for what??
When you hear ML speak you can hear the desperation in his voice, a mixture of anger mixed with almost a pleading tone. Will be interesting to know when ACL accounts are next out, as they should shed some light on their claim to be able to survive without needing the club. If indeed the accounts do show ACL financial fortunes are improving, and that they are no longer dependent on the club, what options do SISU have left?
SydneySkyBlue
Member
Surely news of them suing the fans is more damaging for their reputation than anything that article could have done. Is Paul McCarthy still advising them?
I notice lordsummerisle and co have gone quiet...
Gold Star Super Fan
I notice lordsummerisle and co have gone quiet...
Gold Star Super Fan
James Smith
Well-Known Member
Well they have left exactly what was alleged in the summer by ACL. The chance to tie everyone involved up in expensive litigation.
SkyblueBazza
Well-Known Member
Is it perhaps that such is the contempt they have for us, the fans, that they have segmented us into non-Guardian reader types so they consider the article itself is of little consequence...whilst in the Guardian. Print it on STB, or in the Daily "blah" tabloid & the proverbial hits the fan (no pun intended)
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
What service would that be?