Claudia Rosett: UNESCO’s Influence Efforts in D.C.

An interesting speech:

So, when can we leave the UN?!?!?

That whole organization is corrupt to the core…

The Dr. Dawg saga continues…

Last year, I reported on the courtroom proceedings in the defamation lawsuit John Baglow (aka Dr. Dawg) had brought against Connie and Mark Fournier:  part 1 and part 2.

The judge in that hearing dismissed it in a summary judgment for the Fourniers.  (In his ruling, it seemed clear to me  that the judge did not think Mr. Baglow had handled things well…)

John Baglow appealed.

Now, a panel of 3 judges has ruled that Dr. Dawg will have his day in court:

‘Questions about what constitutes defamation in the caustic world of blogging have not been addressed by Canadian courts “in any significant way,” Blair noted. It means, he said, that a full-blown trial is needed to explore key questions…

In other words, the case may indeed be vexatious, but the judges want to make new laws to govern the internet – and plan to do it on the Fourniers’ dime!


When I know the details of when/where the case will be heard by the court, I’ll update this post.

UPDATE:  While there is still no word of the court date/time, I have received a comment on this from Connie Fournier:

This case will be going to a full-blown trial now and there will be expert witnesses and a full examination of the role of defamation law in the blogosphere.  This is of critical importance to any Canadian who operates a website where visitors are allowed to post comments.  If the law stands as it is, anyone who operates such a site should have $50,000 in the bank so that they can defend themselves when Spockluver sues CaptKirkFan for defaming his online persona.’