But wait, it gets better. Helsingin Sanomat has a story (+ new discussion forum) and another one (requires account) where they have managed to get comments from the lawyer/owner. They are running the story on the front page of economy section. Here is my translation of the funniest pieces:
Where are you basing your claims Member of BAR Antero Molander?
"This is based to this thing, that if someone maliciously puts something like this to Internet, there are damages, and we must at some point cash in on them. We are not going to just watch it."
Can other critics at bigger publications criticize your services?
Of course, if they are professional food critics, and of course if they are appropriate.We can guess what is behind this.
So what is behind this?
Do you know what a blog is?
No I don't really know. What are they?
One of Internet's biggest growing medium of communication, sort of electronic diaries.
Well, every one can make those things to their own (physical) diary books.
Interview by Juha-Pekka Raeste: "why should there be damages for net critique" at Helsingin Sanomat 28.6.2005
Uh.. My brain hurts.
This guy is trying to cash in "rahastaa"?
Blogs should be written in your own diary books?
I am part of some sort of conspiracy that can't be commented?
Monopoly of professional and "appropriate" opinions?
I don't blame people who think that the whole case has been another Internet hoax.
I have spent last two days reading comments from blogs and discussion groups. Man.. I couldn't imagine the response. CopyFraud is is receiving
25.000 70.000 hits a day and all those wonderful comments and rather unexpected (baby magazine) 2 (kauppalehti) 3 (tiede.fi) discussion groups.
People are also talking about Google bombs. I don't really care if my letter is first or second, but think of all the blogs... I took a snapshot of the Google results today because I predict that it will look very different in couple days.