LIBEL SUIT SETTLED AFTER THREATENING INFORM - sent under fair use for educational

[David Farber <farber () central cis upenn edu>]

============================================================================
SUBJECT:  LIBEL SUIT SETTLED AFTER THREATENING INFORMATION PUBLISHED ON
          INTERNET
SOURCE:   Knight-Ridder via First! by INDIVIDUAL, Inc.
DATE:     August 22, 1994
INDEX:    [11]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------


  Akron Beacon Journal via First! : A controversial libel lawsuit that may
have a chilling effect on information published over the Internet was
settled yesterday with promises and $64.


  Brock N. Meeks, a Virginia journalist, has agreed to notify North Canton
direct marketer Benjamin D. Suarez at least 48 hours before he writes any
future stories about Suarez or his company.


  The case may make people think twice before writing something on the
Internet computer network, said Akron lawyer Ronald Kopp, one of the state's
foremost authorities on libel law.


  Suarez launched the lawsuit on March 22 after Meeks wrote in his Internet
newsletter, Cyberwire Dispatch, that a Suarez-run promotion touted as a
money-making venture for those willing to receive electronic junk mail was a
scam.


  Meeks wrote that Suarez's Internet invitation was misleading and was only
a solicitation to spend $159 for software and a get-rich book from Suarez's
mail marketing company, Suarez Corporation Industries. In his March 8 issue,
Meeks mentioned that Suarez tangled with the Washington state attorney
general's office over a mail order package. Suarez also helped to defeat the
attorney general in his bid to be governor, Meeks wrote.


  Under the tentative agreement, Meeks does not have to issue an apology or
a retraction. Under the settlement, Meeks agreed to pay $64 in standard
court costs, and to clarify some of his material.


  Suarez says the clarifications constitute an acknowledgement of poor
reporting. One clarification made by Meeks says a product he mentioned, the
Gutbuster, was marketed by another company, not Suarez Corporation. Meeks
also clarifies that Suarez's company did not face criminal action, as was
implied in the article.


  Also under the settlement, Meeks must submit written questions to Suarez
during normal business hours at least 48 hours in advance of publication.
Suarez will have at least 42 hours to respond, but Meeks would not have to
use any of the comments. Failure to meet the conditions of the settlement
would cost Meeks a $10,000 fine.


  The case was closely watched because it is considered an early pioneer in
the area of libel law in electronic journalism. The case and its resolution
threatens to throw cold water on what many Internet users consider to be a
free-flowing environment of open exchange of ideas and opinions.


  In fact, Meeks has said that Suarez's suit violates the rules of the road
on the talk-and-let-talk information superhighway.


  "If he had followed the Internet culture - get back online and send a
letter back to everyone who received my column - the whole thing would have
played out on the Internet as it has for years, in an open and frank
dialog," Meeks said. "But they didn't do that."


  The settlement was filed with Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Judge Richard
McMonagle yesterday, and may be signed today or tomorrow, say attorneys.


  Because the settlement is not yet formal, Meeks and his attorney David
Marburger, were reluctant to comment about it yesterday. But Suarez called
the settlement a victory.


  "We are very adamant about the free flow of ideas," Suarez said yesterday.
"We want to protect the First Amendment. What we don't think is right is for
a gossiper to invent a false story about a company and than put it on the
Internet, and that's in effect what he did."


  Suarez's 900-employee company is a $100-million-a-year direct marketing
company which markets a variety of products including jewelry, exercise
equipment, and computers.


  Because the libel case never got to court, it probably will not set
precedent, said Kopp, whose Akron law firm, Roetzel & Andress, represents
the Beacon Journal.


  But the leftovers may leave Internet- and electronic-based free-lance
journalists - especially those without legal protection provided by an
employer - afraid to write future stories, Kopp said. In the settlement,
Meeks says he spent more than $25,000 on legal fees.


  After getting the solicitation for Suarez's book, Meeks said he spent a
month researching the company. He acknowledged that his column used strong
language but said that using opinion in his "heavily-reported" column was
his right.


  "He jumps to the conclusion that we're baiting and switching on him,"
Suarez said. "He made it sound like we're some kind of criminals. What
infuriates us is that...we (have) not done anything wrong."


  By David Adams, Akron Beacon Journal, Ohio


[08-22-94 at 22:00 EDT, Copyright 1994, Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News,
File: t0822214.703]


  Copyright (c) 1994 by INDIVIDUAL, Inc.  All rights reserved.


================================================================================