4 ms·
This precedent definitely won't be abused. Or at least most people here seem to think that? I wish the article would go into detail what exactly the "transgres
by demindiro 3y ago
This precedent definitely won't be abused. Or at least most people here seem to think that?
I wish the article would go into detail what exactly the "transgressive behaviour" is, because now it is unclear to me how far I can take criticism that is either directly or indirectly linked to an individual.
For example, what if I have an extremely poor experience with a seller?
Does it matter if this seller is a business or some random individual getting rid of 2nd hand items?
What if the user being criticized is also anonymous?
In any case, I shall be using throwaway accounts more frequently just to be safe.
- starkparker 3y agoFrom the top-voted comment, the link to the case. Point 1.1 ("De zaak in het kort"): https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/#!/details?id=ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2023:11254 https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/#!/details?id=ECLI:NL:RBDH... > A Facebook user has made anonymous statements in Facebook groups about dating, accusing [the plaintiff], among other things, of having the intention to use and then dump women, of being a pathological liar, and of secretly recording women. Two images of [the claimant] have been placed with these statements. [the claimant] argues that the allegations are untrue and intimidating and that he suffers considerable (reputational) damage. [the claimant] wants Meta to remove what he considers to be unlawful messages. In addition, [the claimant] wants Meta to provide him with information about the identity of the anonymous Facebook user and about any other groups in which this user has made these statements.