5 ms·
What i find baffling is that (according to this article) under Canadian law, you can post whatever defamatory content you want and as long as you dont get sued
by supermatt 4y ago
What i find baffling is that (according to this article) under Canadian law, you can post whatever defamatory content you want and as long as you dont get sued within a year, and no matter if the defamed party knows of it or not, it automatically becomes protected speech? Thats pretty messed up.
- cldellow 4y agoI think the article incorrectly summarizes the judge's order. The order makes clear that it was a lawyer telling the plaintiff that the _US state_ barred the action. > [56] As for the possibility of suing the author of the Defamatory Post for defamation, the Plaintiff was advised by a lawyer in Town B that he was time-barred because, under [State A] law, the action must be brought within one year of its appearance, regardless of when the victim of the defamation sees the publication.
- thfuran 4y agoI don't think [State A] not being Canada does much to make that law more sensible.
- cldellow 4y agoOh, yeah, I think it's a bad law. But whereas I'd find it baffling for Canada to have such a law, I'm somehow not at all surprised that there are US states that are OK with that: "peace, order, and good government" vs "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".
- thfuran 4y agoUS does tend to be on the fairly extreme end of protecting speech.