Talk:Ethical Forestry Investments

Defamatory content versus the full extent of the law
Today, at 2:52 PM, I received an email with a legal threat by Peter Bowdler of Ethical Forestry. It complained that the content of the following URLs is defamatory and potentially dangerous to their business:


 * http://wiki.hardwood-investments.net/360_Invest_Group
 * http://wiki.hardwood-investments.net/Ethical_Forestry
 * http://wiki.hardwood-investments.net/AJP_Ventures
 * http://wiki.hardwood-investments.net/File:Ethical_Forestry_and_AJPVentures_Acacia_Brochure.pdf

Consequently, they “request that the content of these pages is removed by noon, 21st of April GMT.”

Mr. Bowdler says that they “will commence legal proceedings […] in the event that these articles are not removed.” He warns: “We always prosecute to the full extent of the law.”

Mr. Bowdler, Yours is not the kind of email that sets me in a particularly good mood, but I'm sure some of our content has equally ruined your day (or week). However, I still suggest that maybe it's not such a good idea to continue on this course (of legal action). Instead, I propose the following:

In creating this wiki, I've always had a vision of competing viewpoints coming together to present as broad a view of the market as possible. That we – as editors – have added some critical information doesn't mean that we don't allow you and your colleagues to add information or corrections that offer a different (or competing) viewpoint. The only thing we frown upon is simply removing information without an explanation. Of course, this doesn't mean that it can't be appropriate to remove something, but it's best to discuss this first or at least explain it. To this end, each page on this wiki is accompanied by a talk page (similar to this) which allows such discussion to take place.

However, remember that it is most customary to simply add some positive information instead of trying to censor negative information. This is assuming that there's something positive to say, of course. Personally, I think that, if you're earnest about the quality of your product (based on Finca Leola if I'm not mistaken), your doesn't do your offer any justice. Still, I invite you to add your opinion about our critique to that brochure's talk page or to correct any mistakes we made in our critique. It's a wiki. It's open. And it's open to you to.

Legal threats are not a threat to us. They just add fire to the defamation which you so seem to fear. Instead, it would be best if you complete the information provided here with some positive data of your own. If you are not in the possession of such data, it surely must be possible to get some from Finca Leola in Costa Rica? (Are they indeed your Costa Rican partner?)

With friendly regards and hoping to see more of your contributions in the future,

Rowan van der Molen, Apr 18 21:55