RE: Icke and Scuba 2223Cue Resources' Icke seeks to identify Stockhouse poster
2010-10-08 12:00 ET - Street Wire
by Mike Caswell
John Icke, the chairman of Cue Resources Ltd., has filed a lawsuit in the Supreme Court of British Columbia against Stockhouse Publishing Inc., seeking to identify a forum poster called scuba2223. According to the suit, scuba2223 wrote a post which stated that Mr. Icke had stolen documents and committed extortion in Paraguay. Mr. Icke says he asked Stockhouse to help him find scuba2223's real name, but Stockhouse refused to do so without a court order.
The allegations are contained in a brief notice of civil claim Mr. Icke filed against Stockhouse on Oct. 6, 2010. In it, he says that scuba2223 authored a post dated Aug. 27, 2010, under the heading, "Paraguay going after John Icke." The body of the post read: "Paraguayan Authorities are looking for John Icke regarding Cue Resources. The news said he is involved in stealing documents and extorsion [sic]!"
According to the claim, Mr. Icke learned about the post three days after it appeared, and asked Stockhouse to take it down. Stockhouse complied, but by that time 79 readers had viewed it, the suit states.
Mr. Icke claims that the post damaged his reputation by implying that he is involved in criminal conduct and is untrustworthy. The post is so damaging that the person who wrote it does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy, the suit states. Mr. Icke is asking for a court order requiring Stockhouse to disclose information necessary to identify scuba2223, so that he may file a case against that person.
The suit was filed on his behalf by Vancouver lawyer Bruce Elwood of Arvay Finlay. Stockhouse has not yet filed a statement of defence.
Cue Resources, which has a uranium project in southeastern Paraguay, closed Thursday at 6.5 cents.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reader Comments - Comments are open and unmoderated, although libelous remarks may be deleted. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Stockwatch.
For information regarding Canadian libel law, please view the University of Ottawa's FAQ regarding Defamation and SLAPPs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And here we go again with a public company expending shareholder resources on ridiculous litigation.
One can look to BML.V and SLI.v for just a few more recent examples of management who must think issuing threats of BCSC litigation is bona fide a way to achieve their lofty goals, which generally involve attempting to impose libel chill in an attempt to deflect attention from other, far more serious issues.
Libel laws have expanded greatly in this country and it is long past time for management of generally pee poor Venture exhange companies to stop finding creative ways to pee away stakeholder funds that usually don't exist.
https://pennystockjournal.blogspot.com/p/wet-noodle-award.html
Posted by Dumb is what dumb does at 2010-10-08 12:38
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why is it ridiculous litigation when a mans reputation is at stake.Reputation is critical when your livlihood is dependant on public opinion.A senior person in a public company is measured by public information.False and misleading information is damaging.It is time flippant and irresponsible posters of false information be held accountable for the damage they inflict.Spread vicious lies and pay for it!
Posted by Wiser at 2010-10-08 13:12
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CUE is at 6.5 cents
FVR is at 5.5 cents
LGM is at 53 cents
NKL is at 5 cents
RIN is at 6.5 cents
TZM is at 43 cents
TNO is at 25 cents
TLR is at 6.5 cents
WOF is at 12 cents
Posted by halcrow at 2010-10-08 13:43
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is long past time for a survey and list of outcomes from this stupidity. (kudos to Halcrow)
Thus far the only "successful" outcomes related to defamation and internet posters in Canada have been default (and uncollectible) judgements. I have yet to hear about an adjudicated and defended action being resolved, and certainly not since the Supreme court rulings in Decemeber 2009.
Frankly I'm waiting for one of these glass house types to attempt a run at me. I have been a self-represented dufus in BCSC twice and would be delighted to take on one of these tards as an indigent status defendant. I do the due dilligence in great detail so I know which defense I shall rely on.
https://pennystockjournal.blogspot.com/
Posted by Stoxxman at 2010-10-08 14:32
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interesting comments, I have thought about filing a claim against a previous employer. Not sure how these things really work out, doesnt seem that they are ever going to be collectible? Im looking for a lot of dollars as well in unpaid fees, but looked into it with a lawyer, they were talking abotu 10 to 15 thousand for legal fees to start and then it was never a sure thing that one could collect on the judgement. I dont think those kinds of things that people say are warranted.
Posted by interested at 2010-10-08 15:04
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
who ever bothers with the bull boards and really cares about stockhouse-- most of the bull boards are malcontents and who ever reads stockhouse anyways-----saul
Posted by saul seeker of truth at 2010-10-08 15:32
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------