3 ms·
I think it just has to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. If someone anonymously tweets something knowingly false along the lines of "[X] is a rapist/pedophi
by meowface 5y ago
I think it just has to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. If someone anonymously tweets something knowingly false along the lines of "[X] is a rapist/pedophile and I have proof", I agree you should be able to sue that person. A false, defamatory accusation like that can easily ruin your career and life.
But I can imagine plenty of things that someone could argue are defamatory which fall into a much grayer area where I believe court involvement isn't warranted. I think this debate will just run in circles until all of the tweets in question are presented.
- xxpor 5y agoThat is an example that US defamation law would cover as well. For public figures, normally you have to demonstrate actual malice to win a defamation case. But there are certain things that are defamation per se, in other words are always considered defamation unless they're true. The list differs per state, but things like calling someone a pedophile is always on it. Fun fact: saying someone was gay used to be considered defamation per se.
- meowface 5y agoRight. Maybe I'm biased because I'm American, but I think the US defamation laws seem pretty reasonable. I'm curious to see the tweets so I can see how I feel about the UK's laws and enforcement.