Hot answers tagged

10

From http://grammarist.com/usage/libel-slander/: (emphasis mine) Libel is the use of false, defamatory claims about someone in written or printed form. Slander likewise denotes false statements that damage a person’s reputation, but it is committed orally or in any other transient form So a false claim satisfying the definition of defamation would be ...


6

Such a lawsuit would be unsuccessful in the United States, given the numerous barriers imposed by the First Amendment. First, a plaintiff can only win a defamation case if it proves that the defamatory statement was false. If a statement cannot be proven false, it is legally considered a statement of opinion, which is protected by the First Amendment. ...


6

Short Answer "An obstruction conviction cannot stand when it is based on speech protected by an individual’s first amendment right to criticize on-duty police officers" Source: Amicus Brief to Supreme Court of the State of Washington in State of Washington v. E.J.J. I agree with @DaleM's answer. And I want to add to it by picking up on a nuance of ...


5

The Bundesregierung is (like the police, the prosecuting authority, etc.) part of Germany’s executive. StGB § 104a defines under which conditions offences described in chapter 3 Straftaten gegen ausländische Staaten (transl. Offences against foreign states), which consists of § 102, § 103 and § 104, can be prosecuted. One of the conditions is […] und ...


4

Calling someone an "asshole" is, at least in the US, an expression of opinion and so is not defamation. Saying that someone has committed a crime may be defamation, but not if that person has in fact already been convicted of that crime. In general if a statement is provably true, it is not defamation. If all that this hypothetical firms does is to post ...


4

If you state, to a third person, that Joe has performed a criminal act then that is defamation and you can be sued. Unless it is true. However, if you are relying on the truth as a defence you will need to provide evidence that it is. At the moment you lack: a criminal conviction of Joe any physical evidence against Joe any personal knowledge that Joe has ...


4

The answer is likely "yes" in both scenarios, because defamation can be either intentional or negligent. This is what the Restatement says: (1) Publication of defamatory matter is its communication intentionally or by a negligent act to one other than the person defamed. . . . COMMENTS & ILLUSTRATIONS Comment: a. Manner of making ...


3

The site's owners would likely be immune from any civil action based on its users' conduct, under Section 230(c)(1) of the Communications Decency Act: No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider. The users, though, could still face ...


3

If I understand your question, you're asking the difference between something like this: "You shouldn't do business with Bob; he's a child molester. Raped a whole bunch of kids. Everyone knows about it." and this: "You're thinking of doing business with Bob? Huh. That's your call, of course. I won't say anything against Bob. But Bill is in the same ...


3

You say "morally in the wrong" as if there was only one moral code on Earth and this is simply not true. For example, there are moral codes where eating pork is wrong and others where it is not. This site concerns itself with whether a person is legally in the wrong - there are other Stack Exchange sites that concern themselves with moral questions. ...


2

It's not clear exactly what you're asking (surely it's not whether Joe is foolish enough: we have no idea). I think you're asking if you could be sued for defamation for making these accusations. It appears that you are communicating an accusation that Joe is a rapist to some number of women. This falls into the category of per se defamation, which means ...


2

In Canada as in the US, truth is a defence against defamation. Additionally, if the plaintiff makes the statement, then the defendant didn't, and the plaintiff would have no basis for pursuing a person who managed to get him to defame himself. If the people were to accuse the person of committing a crime (sex with a minor), then the potential for defamation ...


2

Alex Jones has been sued for defamation; see Alex Jones Retracts Chobani Claims to Resolve Lawsuit - The New York Times The basis of the lawsuit were the reports published on Infowars (the website and YouTube) that said the (Chobani) factory in Idaho, which employs refugees, was connected to the 2016 sexual assault of a child and a rise in tuberculosis ...


2

There is nothing illegal in the United States about publishing survey results about pretty much anything, so long as you truthfully publish what your survey reveals. Also, foreign judgments related to your publications are not enforceable in the U.S. if they don't meet U.S. legal standards. This is particularly true in the case of sentiment surveys as they ...


2

For defamation, the statement must be untrue and it must damage the person's reputation; it does not have to be malicious, even an innocently made untrue statement can be defamation. It is important to note that making true statements about Jim Smith, 43 year old civil servant in Kentucky can be defamation against Jim Smith, 45 year old civil servant in ...


2

Generally, no A limited purpose public figure must have "thrust themselves to the forefront of particular public controversies in order to influence the resolution of the issues involved" to be a public figure. Merely being a CEO doesn’t do this. Being a CEO at the heart of controversy like Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg or Volkswagen’s Martin Winterkorn does.


2

Truthfully telling another person that you are suing, or planning to sue, your former landlord is not defamation. Truthfully reporting what you yourself hav observed is not defamation either. In general, making truthful statements of fact, or clear statements of opinion is not defamation. However, when you make speculative statements about thinks you do not ...


2

When does it help getting more people on "your side" when taking a claim to court? When relevant testimony given by credible witnesses reinforces your claims and/or serves to reflect your adversary's pattern of conduct in similar situations. If I did try something like this, could it count against me as defamation? Generally speaking, no. The mere ...


2

What are the legal implications of all of this? Person B has a viable claim of defamation for statements falsely attributed to him. If the false representations are severe by falsely attributing to him felonies or moral turpitude, it is defamation per se and therefore person B is not required to prove damages. In order to be awarded more than nominal ...


2

Can I sue someone for publicly calling me a sex offender if I'm not one? Yes. However, in this particular case you need to take a preliminary step regardless of your jurisdiction, which I assume is somewhere in the U.S. Prior to filing any complaint (and I will repeat this below), it is in your best interest that you demand a retraction and removal of the ...


1

If defamatory misinformation were put on a sex offender registry, there is little chance that the defamed person can sue for damages. These registries are government operations, and the doctrine of sovereign immunity prevents the government from being sued, unless they explicitly give permission to be sued over some wrong. There are 50 states and the federal ...


1

The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act in the us (18 USC 1030) criminalizes unauthorized access to computers. The courts have viewed the statute narrowly, so that violation of Terms of Service when a person is authorized to access does not create "unauthorized access". What you are talking about is probably actual unauthorized access. Breaking into a computer ...


1

This is specifically addressing Q2 about ICANN. Unfortunately I don't think you can do anything about the domain without a court order. ICANN doesn't actually handle disputes itself; you make any complaint to the domain registrar, which you can find using the "whois" service. The registrar will have a dispute policy, which will probably be the ICANN one. ...


1

Taking the site offline might infringe First Amendment rights (freedom of expression). Instead, the remedies for damages to your reputation are in the form of a claim of defamation. But your attorney needs to be mindful of the deadline (called the statute of limitations) to file a defamation lawsuit. I have seen several defamation cases fail on appeal simply ...


1

Scenario 1) amounts to defamation because A was aware that his statement would be heard by C. Scenario 2) depends on the circumstances. A reasonable likelihood (and A's awareness) that people frequently walk by that window might constitute circumstantial evidence that A's statement was made negligently.


1

Defamation (Libel and Slander. See J. Jonah Jamerson for the difference between the two) is not a protected act of speech because it is speech used to harm someone on claims of actual damage. Since you are doing this in small claims, you simply have to file the suit in your local court to have the case go through (assuming you don't have a lawyer, who does ...


1

There is a summary of the Protection of Symbols Bill on the Knesset website (it passed a preliminary reading: it has to pass three more readings). There has not apparently been any action since.


1

Does the employer then go on to say "we fired the employee for such-and-such" when contacted by potential future employers, or otherwise make the fact of the firing publicly known? If so, the employer may be committing defamation against B to a third party, which negatively impacts B's likelihood of getting another job. If no, the employer seems to be ...


1

No. Defamation means that party A makes a false statement about party B to party C. In this case, the employer didn't make any statement about the employee to anyone - the employer simply terminated the employment. All states have at will employment, but some states do have something called the "good faith exemption," which means that employees must be ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible