4 ms·

"[Dominion will probable be] treated as a public figure." Why? I'd never heard of them before November 2020, and I imagine that is true for most people. I'd als

"[Dominion will probable be] treated as a public figure." Why? I'd never heard of them before November 2020, and I imagine that is true for most people. I'd also be curious to learn more about what counts as "reckless disregard for the truth", if you're willing to share.

hajile 6y ago
Most people (even people who follow politics) weren’t familiar with Obama before 2007 election cycle. The Covenant Kid was thrust into the media and when he sued for defamation, at least some judges accepted the claim that he was a public figure — even though he was suing over the very thing that thrust him into the national spotlight.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > Most people (even people who follow politics) weren’t familiar with Obama before 2007 election cycle. Obama was a public official, so the standards for public figures that aren’t public officials wouldn’t apply.
- kevinmchugh 6y ago
  Obama became familiar to politics-followers with his 2004 DNC speech, which instantly short listed him for the next Democratic primary. It also made him so popular he went around the country campaigning for other candidates. That's very unusual for a state representative in their first high-profile race. (It helped that he was basically unopposed in his Senate bid)
dragonwriter 6y ago
https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/proving-fault-actual-malice-and-negligence https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/proving-fault-actual-malice... Dominion seems to be very clearly a “Limited Purpose Public Figure” in the domain in which the disputed statements apply. Their lack of general celebrity is a good argument that they aren’t an “all purpose” public figure.
- javajosh 6y ago
  Great link, thank you! That's precisely what I was looking for (and I highly recommend it to anyone else reading this thread). It does seem strange to me that we set the bar so high for defamation, but its one of those times where the trade-off is very clear, and it seems like in this particular case "reckless disregard for the truth" seems to fit extremely well.
  - enraged_camel 6y ago
    > It does seem strange to me that we set the bar so high for defamation Well, it's not that strange, if you look at how frequently mere threats of defamation lawsuits are used to chill free speech.
    - javajosh 6y ago
      Indeed. The solution, though, is simple: every man woman and child in the USA should just get a law degree!
      - tigershark 6y ago
        Every man, woman, person, camera, TV!
    - xxpor 6y ago
      After 2020, any states left without a strong anti-SLAPP statute should make it a priority to pass one.
- newacct583 6y ago
  This is a situation where I think the law sort of fails us, alas. The spirit behind the idea of "public figure" in defamation suits is that these things should not be allowed to become tools used by the powerful to protect themselves from the weak. Being public means you are expected to tolerate criticism that would be tortious when aimed at normal citizens. But the defamer in this case is the President of the United States and his legal team. That sort of falls down.
javajosh 6y ago
On a side note, interestingly every single post I've made in the last week has been downvoted. Even this one, which is literally just asking questions. Its almost like I'm being targeted. Dang? Is something going on?
- dang 6y ago
  You've been getting downvoted by a large number of established HN users, and from a quick look it seems to me that the fault lies with your comments. Maybe there are exceptions, but the ones I saw in that ended up with negative points were unsubstantive and often inflammatory. Please stop posting like that to HN, and make more of an effort to stick to the intended use of the site—thoughtful, informative conversation on topics of intellectual curiosity, avoiding flamebait. Do that and the downvote issue should go away. If it doesn't, you can email us at that point: hn@ycombinator.com. But please don't compound the guidelines breakage by posting like you did here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
ashtonkem 6y ago
Jurisprudence includes the concept of a "Limited Purpose Public Figure", which typically includes anyone or anything that is part of a prominent matter of public interest. It is not a requirement that this person or group be prominent before hand. Unfortunately this occasionally has the effect of making some plaintiffs a LPPF by the very nature of the allegedly defamatory statements made against them, but that's how the law works.
- ibejoeb 6y ago
  > Unfortunately this occasionally has the effect of making some plaintiffs a LPPF I wouldn't call it unfortunate. If you don't want to be a public figure, one thing of which to steer clear is certainly the business of operating voting systems in the US presidential election. This is clearly public interest.
  - ashtonkem 6y ago
    This doesn’t just happen to voting machine companies. Sometimes being smeared by a tabloid or newspaper might generate enough interest to make the victim a LPPF and raise the bar for filing a defamation suit.
vhold 6y ago
One way to demonstrate nobody had heard of them: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=dominion%20voting%20systems https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=d...
- webdevatlurk 6y ago
  The breakdown of interest by subregion is... unsurprising.

hajile 6y ago

Most people (even people who follow politics) weren’t familiar with Obama before 2007 election cycle. The Covenant Kid was thrust into the media and when he sued for defamation, at least some judges accepted the claim that he was a public figure — even though he was suing over the very thing that thrust him into the national spotlight.

dragonwriter 6y ago
> Most people (even people who follow politics) weren’t familiar with Obama before 2007 election cycle. Obama was a public official, so the standards for public figures that aren’t public officials wouldn’t apply.
kevinmchugh 6y ago
Obama became familiar to politics-followers with his 2004 DNC speech, which instantly short listed him for the next Democratic primary. It also made him so popular he went around the country campaigning for other candidates. That's very unusual for a state representative in their first high-profile race. (It helped that he was basically unopposed in his Senate bid)

dragonwriter 6y ago

https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/proving-fault-actual-malice-and-negligence https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/proving-fault-actual-malice... Dominion seems to be very clearly a “Limited Purpose Public Figure” in the domain in which the disputed statements apply. Their lack of general celebrity is a good argument that they aren’t an “all purpose” public figure.

javajosh 6y ago
Great link, thank you! That's precisely what I was looking for (and I highly recommend it to anyone else reading this thread). It does seem strange to me that we set the bar so high for defamation, but its one of those times where the trade-off is very clear, and it seems like in this particular case "reckless disregard for the truth" seems to fit extremely well.
- enraged_camel 6y ago
  > It does seem strange to me that we set the bar so high for defamation Well, it's not that strange, if you look at how frequently mere threats of defamation lawsuits are used to chill free speech.
  - javajosh 6y ago
    Indeed. The solution, though, is simple: every man woman and child in the USA should just get a law degree!
    - tigershark 6y ago
      Every man, woman, person, camera, TV!
  - xxpor 6y ago
    After 2020, any states left without a strong anti-SLAPP statute should make it a priority to pass one.
newacct583 6y ago
This is a situation where I think the law sort of fails us, alas. The spirit behind the idea of "public figure" in defamation suits is that these things should not be allowed to become tools used by the powerful to protect themselves from the weak. Being public means you are expected to tolerate criticism that would be tortious when aimed at normal citizens. But the defamer in this case is the President of the United States and his legal team. That sort of falls down.

javajosh 6y ago

On a side note, interestingly every single post I've made in the last week has been downvoted. Even this one, which is literally just asking questions. Its almost like I'm being targeted. Dang? Is something going on?

dang 6y ago
You've been getting downvoted by a large number of established HN users, and from a quick look it seems to me that the fault lies with your comments. Maybe there are exceptions, but the ones I saw in that ended up with negative points were unsubstantive and often inflammatory. Please stop posting like that to HN, and make more of an effort to stick to the intended use of the site—thoughtful, informative conversation on topics of intellectual curiosity, avoiding flamebait. Do that and the downvote issue should go away. If it doesn't, you can email us at that point: hn@ycombinator.com. But please don't compound the guidelines breakage by posting like you did here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

ashtonkem 6y ago

Jurisprudence includes the concept of a "Limited Purpose Public Figure", which typically includes anyone or anything that is part of a prominent matter of public interest. It is not a requirement that this person or group be prominent before hand. Unfortunately this occasionally has the effect of making some plaintiffs a LPPF by the very nature of the allegedly defamatory statements made against them, but that's how the law works.

ibejoeb 6y ago
> Unfortunately this occasionally has the effect of making some plaintiffs a LPPF I wouldn't call it unfortunate. If you don't want to be a public figure, one thing of which to steer clear is certainly the business of operating voting systems in the US presidential election. This is clearly public interest.
- ashtonkem 6y ago
  This doesn’t just happen to voting machine companies. Sometimes being smeared by a tabloid or newspaper might generate enough interest to make the victim a LPPF and raise the bar for filing a defamation suit.

vhold 6y ago

One way to demonstrate nobody had heard of them: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=dominion%20voting%20systems https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=d...

webdevatlurk 6y ago
The breakdown of interest by subregion is... unsurprising.