- McLibel -

Re: and another McDonald's lie

Posted by: William R. James ( USA ) on March 17, 1998 at 08:13:48:

In Reply to: and another McDonald's lie posted by Jane on June 24, 1997 at 21:19:44:

: One more subject to add to Siamak's list of McDonald's lies:

: The judge also found that McDonald's had falsely accused Helen and Dave of lying. The only reason McDonald's won on the counterclaim was that McDonald's was protected by the legal concept of 'qualified privilege' which took the form of the "right of reply to an attack" made by the defendants and supporters. In other words the $30 billion a year McDonald's were so under attack from two members of the public that they were legally permitted to publish libellous statements about the two.

: What a joke.

No. They were permitted to answer false charges made by the two.

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup