5 ms·

> what I can say about people I think there is a distinction between "say" and "publish". NAL but libel deals with published falsehoods, these are not private

by rkk3 5y ago

> what I can say about people I think there is a distinction between "say" and "publish". NAL but libel deals with published falsehoods, these are not private conversations or communications. Communicating a message to millions on twitter or saying it on TV is different from talking to friends and family. > what I can say about people who’ve sexually assaulted me Remember you can still relatively freely say/publish your opinion; tell a million people they are a monster, creep, treated you poorly etc. But publicly accusing someone of a specific crime or sexual-impropriety is a serious allegation, and to me it seems ok that the accused has a way to legally challenge it and require proof.

eyelidlessness 5y ago
So if I were to name the people who have sexually assaulted me, here in a comment—which I’ve already said I’m terrified to do even though they don’t have an audience here to my knowledge—but if I did so, just said so to an audience, I should be legally liable to prove it? Because I didn’t keep it private? Can you not see how harmful that is?
- rkk3 5y ago
  I think the accused should have the right to legally challenge a public defamatory statement. In this case... it probably wouldn't be a very strong case, just from a quick google search, my guess is they would struggle with 1 & 4 below. For 1) In civil, this is probably preponderance of evidence (>50% true) vs beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal. For 4) Theoretically this has no impact, you are just screaming into the void and they don't even know about it. But it could cause real damage, this is a highly trafficked site, maybe they loose their job or their spouse sees this and divorces them etc. "To prove prima facie defamation, a plaintiff must show four things: 1) a false statement purporting to be fact; 2) publication or communication of that statement to a third person; 3) fault amounting to at least negligence; 4) damages, or some harm caused to the person or entity who is the subject of the statement." https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/defamation https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/defamation
  - alisonkisk 5y ago
    If you can't prove it didn't happen, denying the accusation is libel. Fair is fair. Maybe the real problem is firing someone from their job due to non credible accusations
    - rkk3 5y ago
      > If you can't prove it didn't happen, denying the accusation is libel. Fair is fair. Yes, Bill Cosby was sued this way. He was accused publicly, he denied the accusations & they sued him for defamation. Everything depends though, it can be harder to show a denial caused damages or is not an opinion ie; I disagree with the characterization of events. > Maybe the real problem is firing someone from their job due to non credible accusations Shouldn't an accusation have real potential consequences, like employment termination? In that case sue the accuser for libel.

by rkk3 5y ago

eyelidlessness 5y ago

So if I were to name the people who have sexually assaulted me, here in a comment—which I’ve already said I’m terrified to do even though they don’t have an audience here to my knowledge—but if I did so, just said so to an audience, I should be legally liable to prove it? Because I didn’t keep it private? Can you not see how harmful that is?

rkk3 5y ago
I think the accused should have the right to legally challenge a public defamatory statement. In this case... it probably wouldn't be a very strong case, just from a quick google search, my guess is they would struggle with 1 & 4 below. For 1) In civil, this is probably preponderance of evidence (>50% true) vs beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal. For 4) Theoretically this has no impact, you are just screaming into the void and they don't even know about it. But it could cause real damage, this is a highly trafficked site, maybe they loose their job or their spouse sees this and divorces them etc. "To prove prima facie defamation, a plaintiff must show four things: 1) a false statement purporting to be fact; 2) publication or communication of that statement to a third person; 3) fault amounting to at least negligence; 4) damages, or some harm caused to the person or entity who is the subject of the statement." https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/defamation https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/defamation
- alisonkisk 5y ago
  If you can't prove it didn't happen, denying the accusation is libel. Fair is fair. Maybe the real problem is firing someone from their job due to non credible accusations
  - rkk3 5y ago
    > If you can't prove it didn't happen, denying the accusation is libel. Fair is fair. Yes, Bill Cosby was sued this way. He was accused publicly, he denied the accusations & they sued him for defamation. Everything depends though, it can be harder to show a denial caused damages or is not an opinion ie; I disagree with the characterization of events. > Maybe the real problem is firing someone from their job due to non credible accusations Shouldn't an accusation have real potential consequences, like employment termination? In that case sue the accuser for libel.