[Evangelism] Austin fiasco

Steve McMahon steve at dcn.org
Fri Dec 18 22:57:25 UTC 2009

As a former newspaper brat, I'll just say that this falls far short of
what's needed to prove product libel, so there's no legal standing.

Also, IMHO, this makes Austin look a whole lot worse than Plone. It looks
like a place where the web techs need government assistance.

On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 11:13 PM, Matt Hamilton <matth at netsight.co.uk>wrote:

> Mark,
>  What is the best way of us handling this? That article makes some harsh
> comments about Plone. If Plone were some large corporate I would imagine
> that lawyers would be swinging into action now.
> Do we want to publish some kind of official statement in response? Or
> privately contact that newspaper and ask them to retract their comment. It
> is a quote though so I don't know legal standing. Or do we just keep our
> head down and not draw attention to it?
> http://www.statesman.com/news/texas/local-firm-to-start-city-web-site-redesign-129437.html
> -Matt
> _______________________________________________
> Evangelism mailing list
> Evangelism at lists.plone.org
> http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/evangelism
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plone.org/pipermail/plone-evangelism/attachments/20091218/51b10957/attachment.html>

More information about the Evangelism mailing list