3 ms·
> I'm glad to see that stating the truth is a valid defense. Truth has always been an absolute defence; the Act doesn't change anything in that regard. (Seve
by SEMW 13y ago
> I'm glad to see that stating the truth is a valid defense.
Truth has always been an absolute defence; the Act doesn't change anything in that regard.
(Several of the 'new' defences are just codifications or tweaks of existing defences. I think the only completely new defence is the 'peer-reviewed statement in scientific or academic journals' one).
- jibbist 13y agoIt's a obvious defence, but glad it is the first one listed. Of course what your saying isn't defamatory if it is actually true!
- mpyne 13y ago> Truth has always been an absolute defence No, not always. In English common law truth was originally only a defense in civil libel cases. But it was possible to convict persons of criminal libel, even if the writings were proven true (since it was technically considered as being a breach of the peace as opposed to mere defamation). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libel_Act_1843 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libel_Act_1843