El abogado avisó al foro...

[Perikles]

El abogado avisó al foro, que retiró la nota, pero se negó a proporcionarle el nombre del autor, cumpliendo la norma de protección de datos.

The lawyer complained to the forum, which removed the post, but which refused to provide the name of the poster.......

Does it say that the forum refused to comply with the Data Protection Act by not providing the information, or the forum complied with the Act by not supplying it?



By the way, it continues:

El abogado interpuso una denuncia y quejasonline.com fue condenada a indemnizarle con 6.000 euros por "daños morales y patrimoniales". Sin embargo, el Supremo, invocando una directiva europea, exoneró a los propietarios del foro, porque no son responsables de la opinión de sus usuarios.

El Pais

[irmamar]

Originally Posted by Perikles

El abogado avisó al foro, que retiró la nota, pero se negó a proporcionarle el nombre del autor, cumpliendo la norma de protección de datos.

The lawyer complained to the forum, which removed the post, but which refused to provide the name of the poster.......

Does it say that the forum refused to comply with the Data Protection Act by not providing the information, or the forum complied with the Act by not supplying it?



By the way, it continues:

El Pais

The forum, obeying the Data Protection Law, refused to supply the name of the author. A bit ambiguous but understable in this context.

[Perikles]

Originally Posted by irmamar

The forum, obeying the Data Protection Law, refused to supply the name of the author. A bit ambiguous but understable in this context.

So grammatically, it could mean the opposite? It is only understandable in context if you know the law, which I didn't.

Thanks

[irmamar]

Originally Posted by Perikles

So grammatically, it could mean the opposite? It is only understandable in context if you know the law, which I didn't.

Thanks

To me it is understandable, maybe it is not for you.

What is not clear is which is the subject in your sentence, that's the reason of its ambiguity:

El abogado avisó al foro, que retiró la nota, That's clear, isn't it?

pero se negó That is the question. There could be two subjects: el abogado and el foro.

a proporcionarle el nombre del autor, cumpliendo la norma de protección de datos.

El abogado se negó a proporcionarle el nombre del autor, cumpliendo...

El foro se negó a proporcionarle el nombre del autor, cumpliendo...

How could you solve the problem?

El abogado avisó al foro, que retiró la nota pero se negó a a proporcionarle el nombre del autor...

Just a comma is the solution.

[Perikles]

Originally Posted by irmamar

To me it is understandable, maybe it is not for you.

Well, clearly not to me, which is why I started the thread . But I saw a different ambiguity, which I suppose was not there. I guessed it might have meant

The forum refused to provide details, thus complying with the Data Protection Act,

OR

The forum refused to provide details, thus also refusing to comply with the Data Protection Act

[aleCcowaN]

By default, the subject who "retiró" is the same subject that "se negó", no matter there's a comma or not. How come? Nothing is said to "novate" the subject even when some parts of the speech like "pero" or "aunque" call for phrases contrasting the previous ones, even when using "pese a que" which contains a sort-of-verb.

Anyway, it doesn't harm to add some hints to aid people who read in a rush -almost everybody nowadays-:

El abogado avisó al foro y éstos retiraron la nota, pero se negaron ...
El abogado avisó al foro, que retiró la nota, pero con la negativa a revelar ...

[irmamar]

La eliminación de la coma evita la ambigüedad al eliminar la posible duplicidad del sujeto. Sí o sí.

[aleCcowaN]

"..., pero se negó" and " ... pero se negó" (press "Recuperar" for instances, and "Ver estadística" for countries)

choice-supportive bias