3 ms·
Do they typically prevent this? Somethink like libel (or slander I always confuse the 2) often can be defended with proof. So, I wouldnt have a problem with a
by vonklaus 11y ago
Do they typically prevent this? Somethink like libel (or slander I always confuse the 2) often can be defended with proof.
So, I wouldnt have a problem with a company not wanted to litigate false claims, but true claims being muzzled is another thing.
- snark42 11y agoA N-D keeps you from saying anything that a court might rule is negative regardless of truth. For instance if I say, "I liked working at Company X but I think the CTO lacked leadership skills/vision" that's disparagement. It subjective/opinion, but assume you have factual reasons you could use to back-up how you formed that opinion.
- davelnewton 11y agoIIRC "disparagement" has a legal definition that's roughly "injurious or misleading falsehood". An opinion cannot be false. The legal definition of disparagement is different than general usage. For example, PA law: * The statement is false; * The publisher either intends the publication to cause financial loss or reasonably should recognize the publication would result in financial loss; * Financial loss does in fact result; and * The publisher either knows that the statement is false or acts in reckless disregard of its truth or falsity. There is debate regarding the efficacy of non-disparagement clauses for a variety of reasons, but it's often tough to make them stick.