PRESS RELEASE
Libel Action Against Discussion Board User

March 24, 2005

THE MOTLEY FOOL COMMENTS ON THE SETTLEMENT OF THE LIBEL ACTION BROUGHT BY TERRY SMITH OF COLLINS STEWART TULLETT

Popular personal finance and investing website The Motley Fool today commented on the settlement of a High Court libel action brought by the chief executive of City firm Collins Stewart Tullett. As a result of yesterday's settlement, Terry Smith won "substantial damages" from Jeremy Benjamin, a fund manager who posted what he now accepts were false allegations on www.fool.co.uk.

Using the name "Analyser71", Benjamin - who was working for a fund management company at the time - posted his allegations on the discussion board area of The Motley Fool website, where registered users can express their views about a huge range of financial matters.

Spokesman for the Motley Fool, George Row, Producer for the Online Community part of the website, said:

"The users of our discussion boards share their personal financial experiences in order to help others to learn from them. We allow people who abide by our Terms of Use to post on our discussion boards, with many users choosing to use a pseudonym or nickname. Using such a name protects the privacy of the person posting, but does not give them any protection from the law. This case is a timely reminder to all of us that the law on defamation applies as much on the internet as it does elsewhere."

When someone registers as a user of The Motley Fool, they agree to a set of "Terms of Use", which remind them of their obligations under the law. Also, they are provided with a set of Posting Guidelines, which characterise the users as an "online community" and emphasise the importance of building trust between members of that community.  Users are encouraged to report to the website administrators any message that they feel is inappropriate or does not aspire to the high standards set out in the guidelines. 

Mr Row went on to say:

"We keep discussions civil and constructive with minimal intervention, partly thanks to the positive influence of experienced posters who have 'grown with us' over the years. Thanks to the vigilance of our community, we can usually nip in the bud anything that would threaten our ethos of 'civil discussion for mutual benefit'." 

"Of the three thousand or so messages posted each day, we remove only a handful which infringe our rules, or are rude or unhelpful. We are not in a position to determine the truth of those thousands of messages. Our guidelines start by advising readers to do their own research, to think critically before acting on such messages, or indeed any other information they receive." 

"In cases such as this - and in any case when someone makes a formal complaint - we pride ourselves on reacting quickly and in accordance with the terms and conditions of our website."

- ENDS -
___________

Contact Information

Stuart Watson, Editor, The Motley Fool UK
E-mail: StuartW@Fool.co.uk
Phone: (020) 7025 5515
Fax: (020) 7025 5540

NOTES TO EDITORS

About The Motley Fool

Known to many as the website behind the best-selling books, The Motley Fool's mission is to tell people the truth about finance, helping them to take control of their money and make better financial decisions.

Launched in 1997 and now perhaps the UK's most popular no-nonsense personal finance website, www.fool.co.uk has around 27 million page views and 450,000 visitors every month. With thousands of messages posted each day, the discussion boards are one of the busiest areas of the site. 

1. The Fool's website can be found at: http://www.fool.co.uk.
2. The Foolish discussion boards can be found here: http://boards.fool.co.uk.
3. The Motley Fool UK has almost 1.5 million registered users.
4. About a third of daily visitors to the website visit the discussion boards.
5. About three thousand messages are posted on a typical weekday.
6. The Terms and Conditions of Use are here: http://www.fool.co.uk/ukrules.htm.
7. The Posting Guidelines for the discussion boards are here: http://www.fool.co.uk/community/posting/posting.htm.
8. The above High Court settlement is explained in more detail in today's Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,3604,1444444,00.html.