Comments:Law firm tries to ban new book by Cambridge Press
This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.
Quick hints for new commentators:
- Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
- Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
- You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading
Ah, capitalism. You've helped democracy so much...I really feel for this guy, maybe he can give into demands then, whoops, accidentally leak the original copy... --Poisonous (talk) 03:37, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
"Reason to believe"???
edit This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.
Quick hints for new commentators:
- Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
- Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
- You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading
The law firm is quoted as saying that they "...have reason to believe that the Book may contain serious, untrue and damaging defamatory allegations about our client..." It makes one wonder how they can be so certain about the contents of an unpublished book. But, maybe Mr. Client was sent an advance copy so he could write up a nice blurb for the dust jacket. —Eodril (talk) 10:33, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
This is terrible —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.154.26.251 (talk) 14:23, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Both sides of the story?
editWas Spicer contacted for comment? 69.140.152.55 02:49, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Why print it and waste paper
editWhy print it and waste paper? Hasn't technology arrived yet at our door? I use a very small device to read, a bit larger than a telephone. Release it as creative commons by-sa if possible, in any country outside the UK. Logictheo (talk) 07:31, 7 October 2008 (UTC)