What is libel and slander?

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

bobomonkey

New member
Dec 2, 2006
168
2
0
I've been thinking of starting a new blog which may occasionally give opinions about certain individuals and wonder... if there is someone that annoys you and you want to talk shit about them, but don't wanna get sued for slander or libel, how do you go about that?

Here's an example... some dude pissed off at Vonage and does a video review... would this be crossing the line? What about freedom of speech?

YouTube - Vonage review
 


Libel and slander are nothing more than tools for frivolous lawsuits. When you want to sue someone but you have no grounds for it you sue them for libel or slander. So the inherent problem with them isn't the actual lawsuit and loosing. They actually have to show and prove damages in order to win anything and on top of that it can't infringe on your first amendment rights. So its not a matter of being afraid of loosing or winning a lawsuit. Just the act of getting sued is a pain in the ass and costly to you and sometimes even stressful. That's why most people do those kind of lawsuits just simply because they want to cause you harm because they're pissed off at you. 99% of the time when it actually comes down to them having to stand up in court and plead to a court to give them money because you hurt their feelings, they won't do it. They just want to muscle you around a bit and make you worry or apologize or take back what you said.

Which is exactly the solution. If you get a libel or slander lawsuit threat you welcome it with open arms (much like jon usually does). Typically you only have to make a public example out of one person and blow it up as big as possible before the rest decide you're not worth it. Most actual filed lawsuits of that nature can be very easily deterred simply by faxing a letter to the judge asking him to review and throw out the case before it hits the court. Most seasoned judges are very quick to spot bullshit in a frivolous lawsuit and have no patience for them.
 
bobomonkey: Actually, the drawing could be libel (although isn't for reasons stated below). Slander is an oral/aural offence. Libel is any material that is published and transmitted between the author and another party or parties.
Both offences have the litmus test of if it's true, and if it damages the reputation or community standing of the agreived party in the eyes of "right minded" (whatever that means) people.
The drawn penis-in-mouth thing clearly doesn't meet either as it's obviously fake, and designed more for satire than for reputational damage.

As Eli said though, 99% of libel cases are frivilous exercises aimed more at wasting your time, energy and resources than actually getting a ruling against you.

Politicians get "Parliamentary / House privilege". It basically means they can say whatever the fuck they like, so long as it's during a session of Government, and the relevant laws aren't applicable. Then, media outlets can report on it, and they're just reporting what happened in a government session.
Unfortunately, privilege has slipped a lot lately and seems to cover a lot outside government sessions now as well.

Example:
There was a really big issue about it in Australia a couple years back when B Heffernan (LP, and flaming nut job) made the most obviously fake receipts for a prostitution service (it's legal here) claiming they were from the office of Justice Kirby (who is an openly homosexual High Court judge). Because they were produced in a session of Parliament, even though it took less than an hour to conclusively prove they were fake, Heffernan didn't face any repercussions because it was all "privileged" away.
 
Libel and slander are torts against the reputation and 'good character' of a person or a corporate entity.

Libel is written and it covers statements made in print or on the Internet.

Slander is verbal/oral.

The US requires that for a statement to be considered libelous/slanderous it must go beyond the reach of parody (See Falwell vs. Hustler). Of course, as a base minimum all libel and slander must involve FALSE statements. You can't sue someone if what they published is TRUE or just reflecting PUBLIC RECORDS.
 
Deliguy said:
Libel and slander are nothing more than tools for frivolous lawsuits. When you want to sue someone but you have no grounds for it you sue them for libel or slander. So the inherent problem with them isn't the actual lawsuit and loosing. They actually have to show and prove damages in order to win anything and on top of that it can't infringe on your first amendment rights. So its not a matter of being afraid of loosing or winning a lawsuit. Just the act of getting sued is a pain in the ass and costly to you and sometimes even stressful. That's why most people do those kind of lawsuits just simply because they want to cause you harm because they're pissed off at you. 99% of the time when it actually comes down to them having to stand up in court and plead to a court to give them money because you hurt their feelings, they won't do it. They just want to muscle you around a bit and make you worry or apologize or take back what you said.

Which is exactly the solution. If you get a libel or slander lawsuit threat you welcome it with open arms (much like jon usually does). Typically you only have to make a public example out of one person and blow it up as big as possible before the rest decide you're not worth it. Most actual filed lawsuits of that nature can be very easily deterred simply by faxing a letter to the judge asking him to review and throw out the case before it hits the court. Most seasoned judges are very quick to spot bullshit in a frivolous lawsuit and have no patience for them.
Click to expand...
This is not true. You do not have to prove damages if someone libels/slanders your business.
 
engaged said:
This is not true. You do not have to prove damages if someone libels/slanders your business.
Click to expand...

Way to chime in with an empty statement and nothing to back it up.

How To File a Lawsuit for Slander | eHow.com
Understand the law. Generally, to prove slander, you must be able to show that someone made a false and unprivileged statement about you, this statement was conveyed to a third party and this statement resulted in damage to you.
Click to expand...
A whole explanation as it pertains to the internet is available here:
Libel, Slander, "Criminal" and Misconduct Allegations, Quotations, Internet - Labor Law Talk
However, only
certain types of statements are slanderous per se and do not require
proof of pecuniary damages; these include imputation of crime, of
loathsome disease, or of professional or occupational incapacity.
Click to expand...
 
From what I understand, if you talk about a company and are truthful and factual, you are in the right to do so. Of course, the company will hire lawyers to still win, but what the law states is that you cannot make something up and hurt their business intentionally.
 
firetown said:
From what I understand, if you talk about a company and are truthful and factual, you are in the right to do so. Of course, the company will hire lawyers to still win, but what the law states is that you cannot make something up and hurt their business intentionally.
Click to expand...
absolute truth is a defense to libel/slander. If you libel/slander a business though, they DO NOT have to prove damages... you can still lose and pay punitive penalties AS WELL as potential loss of business.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom