During the summer-period we had a period of relaxation. During that period our court case with Scientology was felt as a burden we "could cast off, if only Scientology dropped their fake-version of our The New Dialog. They called it The Genuine Dialog and made it look somewhat similar to our magazine. We had taken them to court and had at the same time asked the judge to mortify some statements from Scientology as libelous and defamatory.
The judge took the standpoint that the statements were not defamatory as such, but that the magazine was too close to our magazine, and Scientology had to drop the name and the attempt to look like us.
In that situation we accepted to stop the court case with a joint letter in which we among other things stated that we realized that the judge did not consider the accusations of Scientology libelous. But since he did in fact stop the misuse of our magazine, we accepted it as a fact that he did not pass a sentence on their false statements.
The letter was published by Scientology with an "explanatory" note, according to which we accept that the accusations against the Dialog Center are "not unfounded."
We hope that our readers can understand the difference between our acceptance of the fact that the judge did not find those statements of such a nature that they were libelous (according to juridical language) and our statement that we accepted it as a fact that the judge made this conclusion.
Maybe Scientologists can not understand the difference. That is their problem. But we have to take the consequence of such a lack of understanding that we consider any idea of a peace or armistice as nul and void.The joint letter concluded that any violation of the settlement and its terms will imply a remedy of 10,000 DKK. The Dialog Center of course expects such a remedy to be paid by Scientology as soon as possible. In the meantime we conclude that we are entitled to tell the truth about this story, a truth which is typical for Scientology.