Re:Scientists maybe able now to speak their mind in the uk
by fun2have on Thursday April 01, 2010 @09:00AM
(#1234452)
The judges have also adopted the US ruling over a libel action over a scientific controversy :-
We would respectfully adopt what Judge Easterbrook, now Chief Judge of the US Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, said in a libel action over a scientific controversy, Underwager v Salter 22 Fed. 3d 730 (1994):
“[Plaintiffs] cannot, by simply filing suit and crying ‘character assassination!’, silence those who hold divergent views, no matter how adverse those views may be to plaintiffs’ interests. Scientific controversies must be settled by the methods of science rather than by the methods of litigation. … More papers, more discussion, better data, and more satisfactory models – not larger awards of damages – mark the path towards superior understanding of the world around us.”
Re:Scientists maybe able now to speak their mind in the uk
by btilly on Thursday April 01, 2010 @09:02AM
(#1234458)
It is sad that in the 21st century there would even be a question in a first world country about whether the scientific method should be allowed to proceed unimpeded.
We would respectfully adopt what Judge Easterbrook, now Chief Judge of the US Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, said in a libel action over a scientific controversy, Underwager v Salter 22 Fed. 3d 730 (1994): “[Plaintiffs] cannot, by simply filing suit and crying ‘character assassination!’, silence those who hold divergent views, no matter how adverse those views may be to plaintiffs’ interests. Scientific controversies must be settled by the methods of science rather than by the methods of litigation. … More papers, more discussion, better data, and more satisfactory models – not larger awards of damages – mark the path towards superior understanding of the world around us.”
From http://www.5rb.co.uk/docs/BCA%20v%20Singh%20[2010]%20EWCA%20...