3 ms·

I wonder if this is technically a type of defamation. I'd think the tracking company would need to have some degree of proof as to the "bad behavior" they're s

by kirykl 7y ago

I wonder if this is technically a type of defamation. I'd think the tracking company would need to have some degree of proof as to the "bad behavior" they're sharing with it's member bars to hold up in court.

sailfast 7y ago
Not a lawyer, but I could also see this pretty readily thrown out on discrimination grounds. "Hey, why is it that only people of color get thrown out of your bar?" Or, for the company: "Why is your banned list X% this race vs. the norm and can you prove that you are not aiding in large scale discrimination?"
ThrustVectoring 7y ago
It absolutely can be. Defamation definitions vary by state, but in general it's something like: 1. A false statement 2. Made to a third party 3. About a specific person 4. That causes damages (eg, to their reputation) If they repeat something false, it absolutely is defamation. Damages could be hard to prove or show - perhaps a business meeting at a bar would qualify. Likely way to use this is through sending the company a demand letter basically saying "remove these false statements from your database or I will sue you for defamation."
- gknoy 7y ago
  If all they are doing is recording that one was thrown out of a bar, and the reason _the bar_ says it happened, those are all truthful things. They aren't saying you did that, they're saying that _the bar_ said you did that. It seems rotten, but I'm sure that's the kind of loophole they'd use as defense. :)
  - ThrustVectoring 7y ago
    It's complicated, but this is explicitly not recognized as a defense by courts. If Alice tells me "Bob says that Charlie started the fire", whether or not that statement is defamatory depends on whether or not Charlie actually started the fire, not on what Bob actually said. The more likely legal defense is Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which shields online service providers for liability for hosting online content from third parties.

by kirykl 7y ago

sailfast 7y ago

Not a lawyer, but I could also see this pretty readily thrown out on discrimination grounds. "Hey, why is it that only people of color get thrown out of your bar?" Or, for the company: "Why is your banned list X% this race vs. the norm and can you prove that you are not aiding in large scale discrimination?"

ThrustVectoring 7y ago

It absolutely can be. Defamation definitions vary by state, but in general it's something like: 1. A false statement 2. Made to a third party 3. About a specific person 4. That causes damages (eg, to their reputation) If they repeat something false, it absolutely is defamation. Damages could be hard to prove or show - perhaps a business meeting at a bar would qualify. Likely way to use this is through sending the company a demand letter basically saying "remove these false statements from your database or I will sue you for defamation."

gknoy 7y ago
If all they are doing is recording that one was thrown out of a bar, and the reason _the bar_ says it happened, those are all truthful things. They aren't saying you did that, they're saying that _the bar_ said you did that. It seems rotten, but I'm sure that's the kind of loophole they'd use as defense. :)
- ThrustVectoring 7y ago
  It's complicated, but this is explicitly not recognized as a defense by courts. If Alice tells me "Bob says that Charlie started the fire", whether or not that statement is defamatory depends on whether or not Charlie actually started the fire, not on what Bob actually said. The more likely legal defense is Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which shields online service providers for liability for hosting online content from third parties.