Legal issues when making forecasts

[mf_dolphin]

Actually case law protects the owners of an internet forum in this type of case. Only when notified of slanderous/copywritten/etc type material and failing to take action could the owners be at fault. If you'll remember back when you joined there is actually a statement that says that the posts are the sole work of the author

[hiflyer]

Yes...but his well-written, good punctuation, proper spelling thesis for his first post on his day of joining was a legal question targeted to websites linked off of S2k...or her.

The game is afoot.
Sir Arther Connan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes

[WxGuy1]

Can I sue someone (and win) if I read their opinion on some stock only to lose everything when it plummets? Can I sue and win if someone says that the Xbox 7232910 will be the next big thing, only to end up losing money because it ISN'T the next big thing? Most people realize these are OPINIONS, and sueing for taking action on the opinion of any person on here seems baseless. In that case, YOU'RE the ignorant one for believing that person. If I say Hurricane BS will weaken to a TS and hit FL, while it really goes Cat 8 and hits Long Island (with the official NHC forecast indicating correctly), and you lose because you didn't prepare because you read "some guy's" forecast "on some forum", that's you're own fault. The day the user making the amateur forecast gets sued is the day any talk about the future of stocks or the market is illegal, and the speculation or discussion about anything pertaining to the future becomes criminal.

Of course, when I say "you", I'm not explicity referring to YOU, the person who started this thread! The "you" is the person who reads a forecast here and sues because it's incorrect. Most folks on here probably give their best forecast, so in no way am I insinuating anything about the quality of forecasts.

[Truth Seeker]

Ah... very interesting commentary on this subject from many posters. Back in 2002, Klein and Pielke wrote a 2-part AMS Journal on the very subject of "suing for the weatherman" both in the government and private sectors and broke down the many cases involving liability in the face of natural events and the limit of predictability.

I close with a few remarks. Many of you are correct, there is probably no way someone could successfully sue an errant forecast. But then in civil law its not about who is right, its about who presents the best argument and sways the judge or jury to that argument. In turn, most people would win the suit, but the cost of defending it is quite high - probably in the tens of thousands of dollars creeping up to astronomical dollar numbers which is why a good amount of cases settle out of court.

Anyways, good luck with those individuals testing their prognostic abilities. I have enjoyed the lively debate on such a sensitive topic. The "Truth Seeker" now signs off and shall not return.

[Bailey1777]

Sorry mod's but I gotta do it "What a nerd!"

[TheShrimper]

Good, keep true to your word, and don't ask questions again that in your mind, you already have the answers to.

[Downdraft]

First off, hurricanes and weather in general is deemed "an act of God." That's kind of funny considering today's politically correct climate but none the less a forecast is an opinion. The only possible way I could see someone getting sued is if they misrepresented themselves to be something they are not; i.e. an agent of the NHC or National Weather Service. Secondly you'd have to prove that what they told you caused you damage. Pretending to issue an evacuation order which you could reasonably believe to be valid and acting upon it at your expense.
On the internet let the buyer beware. If someone chooses to take action based upon the forecasts found on a weather board over the forecasts found on the NHC website they might find a lawyer to take their case but they'd also find a judge that would throw it out.

[Bailey1777]

AMEN!!!

[KatDaddy]

Truth Seeker I give you credit for your intensity but there are many more battles for you to win outside of the tropics.

[jlauderdal]

Good, keep true to your word, and don't ask questions again that in your mind, you already have the answers to.

Hopefully he/she hit the law library like i suggested last night and we get free full report on the findings in about 10 months or so.

[Bailey1777]

The sad thing to me is that this seems like a very intellectual person looking for a crowd to wow, when instead they could be doing something really usefull with their time.

[Derek Ortt]

I feel that this is a legit question, and one I considered when starting NWHHC in 2002

A statement releasing users from all liability linked form the home page stating that the forecasts are independent or non official for public disclosure should be used, so that the general public knows that it is not official gov't information

I even did this on the nwhhc site during RAINEX last year when the forecasts were the official RAINEX forecasts, because the official use was NOT for the general public, only for the field program

[Robjohn53]

This site to me is awsome i like coming here to learn and try to understand these things, but tonight i learned a very very valuable lesson on top of it all and that is: Never Never ask that question here lmao. Although this topic never crossed my mind, i am so glad i read this thread....Always nice to know what not to do..hehehe

[Matt-hurricanewatcher]

I personally don't see any problem in having a option about tropical cyclones...Heck the first Amement gives us the right to have a option. A whole lot worst gets said in allowed in this country, in that should be allowed. But its still your right to say. We should all stand by are freedoms. Where doe's it say that we can not discuse are love of hurricanes(Forecast)them? I'v never came across it if you or it has.

I went to be linked to the law that says we can't make forecast?

[Matt-hurricanewatcher]

Also I been making my forecast/option on cyclones for years. If I'm going to get into this...Then all that are founding fathers gave to us is gone!

I should be in jail right now for making all the forecast I make!

[Matt-hurricanewatcher]

Actually case law protects the owners of an internet forum in this type of case. Only when notified of slanderous/copywritten/etc type material and failing to take action could the owners be at fault. If you'll remember back when you joined there is actually a statement that says that the posts are the sole work of the author

I got a quastion...If you or storm2k can't get into trouble over it, in people should know that this is a place for nonpro's to discuse. Then why the disclaimer? This is a quastion I been wenting to ask.

[CajunMama]

Matt, we stress that people heed their local mets and the NHC who are professionals. You use our disclaimer because you are not a professional met.

[Una]

Actually case law protects the owners of an internet forum in this type of case. Only when notified of slanderous/copywritten/etc type material and failing to take action could the owners be at fault. If you'll remember back when you joined there is actually a statement that says that the posts are the sole work of the author

You may wish to meet with your legal council again about that.
The way my attorney explained it to me was as soon as someone in an official position makes any changes (moderator/admin editing posts) you lose all those protections because you set precedent as to an official position of allowing/disallowing content.
I may have misinterpreted something, but I believe that was the gist of it.

[hial2]

Miami Dade county is asking the feds for money to cover the expenses occurred by failed storm "Ernesto"..apparently,someone is upset because Ernesto wan't the storm the NWC said it was going to be..Isn't this what we're talking about??

[kevin]

Actually case law protects the owners of an internet forum in this type of case. Only when notified of slanderous/copywritten/etc type material and failing to take action could the owners be at fault. If you'll remember back when you joined there is actually a statement that says that the posts are the sole work of the author

You may wish to meet with your legal council again about that.
The way my attorney explained it to me was as soon as someone in an official position makes any changes (moderator/admin editing posts) you lose all those protections because you set precedent as to an official position of allowing/disallowing content.
I may have misinterpreted something, but I believe that was the gist of it.

Dude your attorney is bad, if you're going to sue this site, do you realize that there will be thousands of dollars donated to cover legal expenses? You'll need a better attorney.

Unless this is a post about how you a message board owner sought legal advice. I'm nervous as to what the percieved threat is, and why its being brought up. Will Storm2k be the next McDonalds lady spilling coffee on her lap, with the coffee being Josephine's forecasts???