http://www.talkinternational.com/


http://www.talkinternational.com/legal_barrett_baratz_vs_talk_notice_m
ay_10.htm

http://www.talkinternational.com/legal_barrett_baratz_vs_talk_counterc
laim.htm


TALK - LEGAL Action- Barret & Baratz vs. Talk International et. al

Court File No. 01-CV-213449

ONTARIO

Superior Court of Justice

BETWEEN:

Dr. Stephen J. Barrett and Dr. Robert Baratz

Plaintiffs

-and-

Wayne Obie, Talk Canada, Frances Perrin and Talk International

Defendants

STATEMENT OF DEFENCE AND COUNTERCLAIM

OF WAYNE OBIE AND FRANCES PERRIN

1.The Defendants dispute each and every allegation contained in the
Statement of Claim, save for paragraphs 7 and 8.

2.The Defendants dispute the jurisdiction of this Court as a "forum
non conveniens."

3. Notwithstanding the foregoing dispute to jurisdiction of the
within proceeding, and without attorning to the jurisdiction, the
Defendants contest the merits of the within action as follows:

4.The Defendant Wayne Obie ("Obie") owns the web domain known as Talk
International.com.

5. The Defendant, Obie denies any ownership of shares or other
interest in the Internet service known as Yahoo Groups, Yahoo
Groups.com, Yahoo ! Inc., or Yahoo.

6. The Defendant, Obie has never been employed or retained either
directly or indirectly by Yahoo Groups, Yahoo, Yahoo ! Inc., or Yahoo
Groups.com

7. The Defendant, Frances Perrin ("Perrin") admits the allegations
contained in paragraphs 7 and 8 of the Statement of Claim.

8. Except as specifically admitted herein, the Obie denies each and
every other allegation contained in the Statement of Claim.

9. Except as specifically admitted herein, Perrin denies each and
every other allegation contained in the Statement of Claim.

10. The Defendant, Perrin states and the fact is, that until being
served by the Plaintiffs with a letter and a Notice dated May 10,
2001, that the Defendant Perrin had never even heard of the
Plaintiffs and had no knowledge either directly or indirectly of
their business or activities.

11. The Defendant, Perrin states and the fact is, that she is not in
any way involved with the Internet sites, Talk International.com or
Yahoo Groups.com, Yahoo, Yahoo ! Inc., or any other internet site or
business either directly or indirectly.

12, The Defendant, Perrin states and the fact is that she has no
ownership interest in either Yahoo, Yahoo Groups, Yahoo ! Inc., or
Talk International.com.

13. The Defendant, Perrin states and the fact is, that she has never
provided services either directly or indirectly, through employment
or any other means, to any company associated with the internet, or
which sends or otherwise delivers internet e-mail, or which is in the
business of broadcasting, on the internet.

14. The Defendant, Perrin states and the fact is that she does not
and never has owned a computer.

15. The Defendants state and the fact is that the trade style known
as Talk Canada, registered to Perrin has been inactive for over four
years.

16. The Defendant, Perrin states and the fact is that she is not and
never has been a part of any international network of individuals or
organizations that promote health information or practices that are
regarded with disfavour by the scientific community.

17. The Defendant, Obie states and the fact is that he is not and
never has been a part of any international network of individuals or
organizations that promote health information or practices that are
regarded with disfavour by the scientific community.

18. The Defendant Perrin states and the fact is that she has not
defamed nor made any comment against either of the plaintiffs either
directly or indirectly, on the Internet or through any other means.

19. The Defendant Obie states and the fact is that he has not defamed
nor made any direct comment against either of the plaintiffs.

20. The Defendant Obie states and the fact is the Plaintiffs have not
suffered any damages as alleged or at all and puts the Plaintiffs to
the strict proof thereof.

21. The Defendant Obie, states that any of the articles complained of
by the Plaintiffs and referred to in "Notice" served by the
Plaintiffs as Exhibit 1, clearly indicate that they are the Opinion
of a Third Party, and are considered as such to be fair comment. Any
statements therein made by a Third Party were clearly in the nature
of an editorial comment.

22. The Plaintiff Stephen Barrett ("Barrett") has not suffered any
damages as alleged. He no longer practices medicine, since he
surrendered his license for reasons unknown to the Defendant and is
no longer licenced to do so.

23. The Plaintiff Robert Baratz ("Barataz") has not suffered any
damages as alleged.

24. The Plaintiffs Barrett and Baratz are together and individually
known to have a history of attempting to discredit integrative and
alternative health therapies. Both Barrett and Baratz are listed as
directors and members of groups and organizations whose sole mission
is to attack and discredit alternative and integrative health
therapies and practitioners.

25. The Plaintiffs have already sued the author of the opinion
complained of in "Schedule A" to the notice of legal action in
California for defamation. The Plaintiffs have chosen to bring the
within proceeding in this jurisdiction against the Defendants herein
and did not name the author of the opinion in this action. Therefore
the within action is brought in a "forum non conveniens". The within
Defendants could have been named in the U.S. action. The author of
the complained of opinion resides in the U.S.

26. The Defendants believe that Plaintiffs have not taken legal
action against Yahoo, Yahoo ! Inc., or Yahoo Groups.com regarding the
alleged defamation which according to the Plaintiffs occurred on a
Yahoo Group web site.

27. The Defendants believe and the fact is the Plaintiffs have not
included or named either Yahoo Groups, Yahoo ! Inc., or Yahoo in the
action brought on by the Plaintiffs and others alleging defamation of
the Plaintiffs by the author, in spite of the fact that the action
against the author has been brought in the state of California, and
that Yahoo ! Inc, Yahoo Groups and Yahoo are registered in and carry
on business in the state of California.

28. The Defendants believe that Plaintiffs and others associated and
working in conjunction and together with the Plaintiffs did request
Yahoo Groups to remove the posted messages, attached as "Schedule A"
during March and April 2001 and that neither Yahoo, Yahoo Groups or
Yahoo ! Inc took any action.

29. The Defendant Obie states that he did not falsely or maliciously
publish any statements about either of the Plaintiffs.

30. The Defendant Obie states that paragraph 13 of the Statement of
Claim does not accurately set out the true content of "Schedule A"
attached to the Notice which schedule is the basis of the Claims made
by the Plaintiffs.

31. The Plaintiffs are not unknown to litigation and have commenced
and been involved in numerous legal actions in the United States
against persons who hold opinions contrary to those of the Plaintiffs
and or the interests whom the Plaintiffs represent.

32. As such the Plaintiffs are professional litigants in that they
routinely file lawsuits and are involved in lawsuits for the sole
purpose of advancing their agendas and creating expense and thereby
harassing person involved in integrative and alternative health
therapies. This is another vexatious action brought by the Plaintiffs.

33. The Plaintiff Barrett has stated publicly that "he is the media"
and as such under U.S. Law, he has no claim for defamation.

34. The Plaintiffs Barrett and Baratz are public figures in the
United States, and have chosen Ontario to claim defamation for this
article because they cannot do so in the U.S.

35. The Plaintiffs have chosen to bring this action in Canada,
notwithstanding the fact that their claim involves alleged
publication of defamatory material on an Internet site. The Internet
is ubiquitous and international in nature, it is unregulated by any
governmental authority. However, the largest potential audience for
any Internet web site is in the United States. As such, the
Plaintiffs have chosen to bring an action against the Defendants in
this jurisdiction since their attempts to bring similar lawsuits in
the United States have not been and will not be successful.

36. The Plaintiffs advocate on behalf of business interests in
competition to those of clients of the Defendant Obie and ones
promoting integrative or alternative health therapies and mercury
free dentistry. Their tactics are to challenge and discredit
legitimate alternative health modalities and they have targeted
individuals and businesses that advocate or are in the business of
making alternative, integrative and progressive medical therapies
available.

37. The Plaintiffs are residents of the United States. The Defendants
thereby request that the Court make a substantial Order for security
for costs against the Plaintiffs herein in consequence of their
predilection for engaging in similar litigation in the United States,
wherein the Courts there are not typically prone to awarding costs
against unsuccessful Plaintiffs who engage in frivolous or vexatious
litigation.

38. The statements contained in the Internet posting made by the
Defendant Obie regarding the Plaintiffs are the opinion of Tim Bolen
as clearly stated therein. The statements are not defamatory for
being truthful. The Defendants put the Plaintiffs to the strict proof
thereof as to anything therein contained that may not be truthful.

39. The Defendant Obie removed the site complained of on or about
April 22, 2001 before being served with the within action. Thereby
even if there was defamation as alleged by the Plaintiffs, none was
in existence on the date that this action was commenced.

40. The Defendants ask that the within action be dismissed against
the Plaintiffs with costs on a solicitor and his own client scale.

August 3, 2001

Wayne Obie

Huntsville, Ontario

Canada P1H 1A7

705.788.7330

Frances Perrin

Huntsville, Ontario

Canada P1H 1A7

705.788.7330

TO: Tory's

Suite 3000

Maritime Life Tower

P.O. 270 TD Centre

Toronto, Ontario

Canada M5K 1N2

Robert P. Armstrong

LSUC#: 107390

Tel: 416.865.7311

Fax: 416.865.7380

Julia E. Holland

LSUC#: 32881D

Tel: 416.865.7652

Fax: 416.865.7380

Solicitors for the Plaintiffs
______________________________________________
Opinion Pieces - by Tim Bolen

These are some of the Opinion Pieces the "quackbusters," (especially
Stephen Barrett) are in a RAGE over. Barrett threatens to sue anyone
who posts them on their website, or re-posts them to news groups. I
wonder why?....

http://www.savedrclark.org/opinionpieces/opinions.htm