4 ms·

I would sue for damage. EDIT: Because they put an image with unterlated information together in such a way that it misleads people.

by pulse7 5y ago

encryptluks2 5y ago
Damages require proof. Unless they can show they lost something because of the mistake, then there are no damages.
- jeswin 5y ago
  It could certainly affect someone's mental health and confidence.
  - encryptluks2 5y ago
    But the author indicated that it hasn't had an impact as of yet.
- andai 5y ago
  Isn't the search result page a form of slander? The burden of proof rests entirely on the slanderer.
- aikah 5y ago
  > Damages require proof. Unless they can show they lost something because of the mistake, then there are no damages. You're basing your understanding of slander/libel on US laws I presume? If that person lives in Europe, generally, the bar for a successful lawsuit is __extremly low__ , it only requires the information to be blatantly false, there is no need to demonstrate the victim incurred any damages.
  - n_u_l_l 5y ago
    The barrier for a successful lawsuit is indeed very low, and based on my limited understanding, I think you will likely win when you demand that Google changes the picture on their website. They will likely also have to cover a part of your legal costs. However if we are talking about monetary damages, those require hard proof of the damages and even then it is unlikely that they will have to pay all damages. Most lawyers I talk to usually recommend against suing for monetary damages.
    - aikah 5y ago
      > However if we are talking about monetary damages, those require hard proof of the damages and even then it is unlikely that they will have to pay all damages. Most lawyers I talk to usually recommend against suing for monetary damages. Well, you can ask for "moral damages" and the judge might grant you these damages in Europe, I'm pretty sure the bar is also quite low for these. If you are from US keep in mind that million dollars damage verdicts are rather uncommon in Europe for individuals. That's the trade off. So judges might grant the suing party "moral damages" much more easily as a counter part. Of course it varies from country to country. IANAL.
  - encryptluks2 5y ago
    Wouldn't that be injuctive relief though instead of damages? Damages would be some kind of loss, which at this point there appears to be none as the author has stated.
- techlaw 5y ago
  Although in the US damages for defamation can include compensatory damages (intended to "make the plaintiff whole" by compensating for monetary losses) they can also include general damages for non-economic impacts (for example mental anguish & damage to reputation) as well as other types of damages. However, not all US states allow all types of damage claims and/or have special rules or higher burdens of proof related to those types of claims. Generally speaking though, it is incorrect to say that somebody must show that they have had actual, monetary damages in order to be successful in a defamation lawsuit. This overview from the Legal Information Institute (Cornell Law School) has some helpful info: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/defamation https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/defamation

I would sue for damage. EDIT: Because they put an image with unterlated information together in such a way that it misleads people.

by pulse7 5y ago

I would sue for damage. EDIT: Because they put an image with unterlated information together in such a way that it misleads people.

encryptluks2 5y ago

Damages require proof. Unless they can show they lost something because of the mistake, then there are no damages.

jeswin 5y ago
It could certainly affect someone's mental health and confidence.
- encryptluks2 5y ago
  But the author indicated that it hasn't had an impact as of yet.
andai 5y ago
Isn't the search result page a form of slander? The burden of proof rests entirely on the slanderer.
aikah 5y ago
> Damages require proof. Unless they can show they lost something because of the mistake, then there are no damages. You're basing your understanding of slander/libel on US laws I presume? If that person lives in Europe, generally, the bar for a successful lawsuit is __extremly low__ , it only requires the information to be blatantly false, there is no need to demonstrate the victim incurred any damages.
- n_u_l_l 5y ago
  The barrier for a successful lawsuit is indeed very low, and based on my limited understanding, I think you will likely win when you demand that Google changes the picture on their website. They will likely also have to cover a part of your legal costs. However if we are talking about monetary damages, those require hard proof of the damages and even then it is unlikely that they will have to pay all damages. Most lawyers I talk to usually recommend against suing for monetary damages.
  - aikah 5y ago
    > However if we are talking about monetary damages, those require hard proof of the damages and even then it is unlikely that they will have to pay all damages. Most lawyers I talk to usually recommend against suing for monetary damages. Well, you can ask for "moral damages" and the judge might grant you these damages in Europe, I'm pretty sure the bar is also quite low for these. If you are from US keep in mind that million dollars damage verdicts are rather uncommon in Europe for individuals. That's the trade off. So judges might grant the suing party "moral damages" much more easily as a counter part. Of course it varies from country to country. IANAL.
- encryptluks2 5y ago
  Wouldn't that be injuctive relief though instead of damages? Damages would be some kind of loss, which at this point there appears to be none as the author has stated.
techlaw 5y ago
Although in the US damages for defamation can include compensatory damages (intended to "make the plaintiff whole" by compensating for monetary losses) they can also include general damages for non-economic impacts (for example mental anguish & damage to reputation) as well as other types of damages. However, not all US states allow all types of damage claims and/or have special rules or higher burdens of proof related to those types of claims. Generally speaking though, it is incorrect to say that somebody must show that they have had actual, monetary damages in order to be successful in a defamation lawsuit. This overview from the Legal Information Institute (Cornell Law School) has some helpful info: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/defamation https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/defamation