April 22, 2000
Mr. Brad Steiner, Esq.
Corporate Counsel
Lycos, Inc.
595 Market Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
415-281-8720
RE: Mr. Kidd's threat of litigation and accusation of libel
Dear Mr. Steiner:
Thank you for your April 12 email response. I am assuming at this point that your response by U.S. mail is also forthcoming but has simply not arrived yet. In the future I shall expect correspondence by U.S. mail, for just as a man's word is only as good as his willingness to sign on the dotted line, signed correspondence on letterhead is now my protection against fraud.
I believe that I understand your position, but would like to clarify a few issues.
As much as I prefer an amicable relationship with Lycos, I must also fully understand why you are making this "proposal." If I were to now change the content of the web site, the law would clearly consider my actions to be an admission of guilt because the logical conclusion would be that I removed them of my own free will, since freedom of speech is a constitutional right and must be waived voluntarily. Please believe me when I say that I would not have made such statements if I could not support and defend them in a court of law. I shall abide by the rules of evidence in the appropriate Court. Of course, Mr. Kidd may yet choose to file a civil action against me for libel. It shall be my pleasure to defend against such action. I have learned to dismiss his threats, for they have become numerous and are void of legal merit.
Considering that electronic law is probably your professional cornerstone, please be kind enough to identify the case or statutory law which governs your proposal. It is my understanding of the law that it does not hold the electronic host provider liable in such cases. Besides, you have my letters to show that I take full responsibility for the statements made at the web sites. Before considering any proposal, I find it essential that I be provided with photocopies of all correspondence from Mr. Kidd to you, since that correspondence has apparently established your belief that there is a need to change my web sites.
If you are attempting to take the role of mediator in this issue, I suggest that your proposal at least be more equitable. Has Mr. Kidd made an offer to file satisfaction of the lien? That is the very minimum that should be expected, considering that Mr. Kidd voluntarily dismissed the foreclosure just hours before my attorney was to take his deposition and Mr. Kidd was to turn over my divorce file. Mr. Kidd was advised that "[his] conduct in refusing to deliver Ms. Portman's divorce file [was] unethical conduct for an attorney practicing law in Georgia." Defending my home from foreclosure required legal fees in excess of $14,000 and because of Mr. Kidd's 11th hour dismissal, the lien now remains as a blight on the title of my home. If Mr. Kidd has, as is suggested by his failure to refile the action within the prescribed time, truly dismissed the action, he should have no hesitancy to now file a notarized Notice of Satisfaction with the Court.
I shall look forward to your reply, for Mr. Kidd has already delayed his threatened lawsuit of libel beyond the stated 30 days. Please respond by U.S, mail, using the enclosed prepared envelope.
Sincerely,
Marquitta Portman