3 ms·
This, and the fact that the truth can not be libelous. As long as you're not misrepresenting a claim, you're fine.
by getsat 15y ago
This, and the fact that the truth can not be libelous. As long as you're not misrepresenting a claim, you're fine.
- WettowelReactor 15y agoYou still need to defend yourself against the suits no matter how unjustified. That is not a free activity in terms of money or time.
- Ergomane 15y agoThat depends on your location. In NL the truth can get you in a lot of trouble. Also not that the TOS tries to make the submitter liable for all damages _and_ cost : http://iwasntpaid.com/terms_of_submission http://iwasntpaid.com/terms_of_submission
- getsat 15y agoIf you stole money from me, I sued you and won the lawsuit, and then published an article about how you stole from me, that could be construed as being libelous?
- Ergomane 15y agoNo, because our law separates defamation into two parts. - Libel (laster) where allegations are not true or the defendant should have known they are not true. - Smaad where allegations are true, or it's reasonable for the defendant to assume they are true. In your example, you could be convicted of Smaad, unless you could show that you 1) acted in the public interest. 2) or needed to defend yourself against eg a counterclaim 3) or did not intend to harm someones good name See http://lexius.nl/wetboek-van-strafrecht/boek2/titel16 http://lexius.nl/wetboek-van-strafrecht/boek2/titel16
- getsat 15y agoInteresting. Thanks for the explanation.