Armchair Internet "lawyers"
Dec. 22nd, 2006 08:44 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
puppetmakerLibel is defined as to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others. Libel is the written or broadcast form of defamation, distinguished from slander, which is oral defamation. (This definition is courtesy of the Law.Com online dictionary which is one of the best I have found.)
Seems pretty straight forward but I am amazed at the number of denizens of the Internet that scream that their uncle (why is it always the uncle?) is a lawyer and because so and so was mean to them they are going to sue for libel (insert an absurd number of exclamation points here probably with some other strange punctuation interspersed).
Being mean is not being libelous. One has to prove harm and considering that unless you can prove malice aforethought you can only sue for actual harm (i.e. loss of business). The other thing that is bloody hard to prove especially for internet exchange, it is that it was stated as fact not as an opinion. If I call someone a horse's behind I am not stating a fact that they ARE a horse's behind but my opinion about how I see them. (Unless they are the back end of a pantomine horse but that is a horse of a different color.)
Also if the thing said about the individual is true, then they don't have a legal leg to stand on. If someone reveals that another individual has mental health issues and they are under a doctor's care for such, they cannot sue for libel since it is true.
I am getting tired of some good debates dissolving into mean spirited name calling usually followed by the "I'm gonna sue you!" chant. Debate uses to be an art form. There are entire contests and clubs that debate each other on a variety of issues and it never devolves into name-calling. Debate is part of our government (or at least was).
Now there are people out there who love to tear down others to make themselves feel good. I call most of them trolls and they have made it their life's work to make everyone feel bad about themselves. Doesn't mean they are libeling anyone. In fact I have found trolls are probably more careful about their phrasing than someone who just says something in anger.
Over the years I have had a number of friends who are lawyers or work for law firms. They have told me some pretty strange stories about clients wanting to sue others for libel over some petty slight. Once the cost of such a suit is pointed out to them along with the fact if they lose in most states they are responsible for the court costs for both parties along with possible fines if the judge rules that this is a frivolous law suit, they tend to decide to not sue but for some strange reason they want to be able to say that they talked to their lawyer.
I'm not says that there are people out there who don't have legitimate cases because there are. I have watched someone's reputation and their livelihood slip away due to some libelous statements by another individual. But most of these cases on the Internet are people being mean to other people or being perceived as being mean. My suggestion is to ignore them which apparently a lot of people find hard to do.
I am grateful that I have only had the threat of being hauled into court to testify in a libel case happen once in my career.
Seems pretty straight forward but I am amazed at the number of denizens of the Internet that scream that their uncle (why is it always the uncle?) is a lawyer and because so and so was mean to them they are going to sue for libel (insert an absurd number of exclamation points here probably with some other strange punctuation interspersed).
Being mean is not being libelous. One has to prove harm and considering that unless you can prove malice aforethought you can only sue for actual harm (i.e. loss of business). The other thing that is bloody hard to prove especially for internet exchange, it is that it was stated as fact not as an opinion. If I call someone a horse's behind I am not stating a fact that they ARE a horse's behind but my opinion about how I see them. (Unless they are the back end of a pantomine horse but that is a horse of a different color.)
Also if the thing said about the individual is true, then they don't have a legal leg to stand on. If someone reveals that another individual has mental health issues and they are under a doctor's care for such, they cannot sue for libel since it is true.
I am getting tired of some good debates dissolving into mean spirited name calling usually followed by the "I'm gonna sue you!" chant. Debate uses to be an art form. There are entire contests and clubs that debate each other on a variety of issues and it never devolves into name-calling. Debate is part of our government (or at least was).
Now there are people out there who love to tear down others to make themselves feel good. I call most of them trolls and they have made it their life's work to make everyone feel bad about themselves. Doesn't mean they are libeling anyone. In fact I have found trolls are probably more careful about their phrasing than someone who just says something in anger.
Over the years I have had a number of friends who are lawyers or work for law firms. They have told me some pretty strange stories about clients wanting to sue others for libel over some petty slight. Once the cost of such a suit is pointed out to them along with the fact if they lose in most states they are responsible for the court costs for both parties along with possible fines if the judge rules that this is a frivolous law suit, they tend to decide to not sue but for some strange reason they want to be able to say that they talked to their lawyer.
I'm not says that there are people out there who don't have legitimate cases because there are. I have watched someone's reputation and their livelihood slip away due to some libelous statements by another individual. But most of these cases on the Internet are people being mean to other people or being perceived as being mean. My suggestion is to ignore them which apparently a lot of people find hard to do.
I am grateful that I have only had the threat of being hauled into court to testify in a libel case happen once in my career.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-12-22 02:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-22 02:25 pm (UTC)I have been screamed at by some of the best ranters in the theater so that is nothing new. There were a couple of directors that requested me as their stage manager and many were amazed when I took the gigs because these directors were notorious as problem making people. I just learned how to deal with them and not take it personally.
Which may be the problem is that everyone seems to be taking everything said sooo personally. Perspective is a wonderful thing.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-22 03:21 pm (UTC)We can all stand to take your example and try and apply it to our own lives.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-22 02:25 pm (UTC)Libel = literature
Slander = spoken
That's how I keep them straight.
Other than that, I agree completely.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-22 02:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-22 02:36 pm (UTC)The owner laughed in his face and told him that she wasn't going to do anything until she saw a court order.
One reason I stay there. He slunk off. It was funny.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-22 02:47 pm (UTC)Oh by the by, Happy holidays to you and your family and best for the "new year" (if you follow the Gregorian calendar *grin*)
no subject
Date: 2006-12-22 05:28 pm (UTC)I honestly think that for some people "I'm going to talk to my lawyer!" is the grownup version of "My dad is gonna beat up your dad!"
That it is just as ineffective in spreading terror never sinks in...
no subject
Date: 2006-12-24 01:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-22 06:39 pm (UTC)Other than that, I agree completely with your entry. It used to be fun to debate, now you only have a couple good posts before it devolves into petty bickering.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-24 01:40 pm (UTC)This came out of talking to a buddy of mine who is a well known SF author who was being told that a fan was going to sic a lawyer (their uncle) on them because the author's last book was too close to a crappy piece of fanfic that the fan wrote. The author pointed out that the fanfic was illegal and the idiot fan scream Slander to which my friend replied you mean libel you jerk and forwarded everything to his lawyer.
Re: Did I miss something?
Date: 2006-12-24 01:45 pm (UTC)Excuse me, I'm about to get snarky.
Is that moron I smell?
What an idiot, do people even think they have cases in these situations or do they think people will just curl up into the fetal position and admit the grand correctness of their argument?
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!
Sometimes people have teh stoopid.
I hope it's not catching.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-24 06:23 pm (UTC)Did I miss something?
Date: 2006-12-23 12:05 am (UTC)Re: Did I miss something?
Date: 2006-12-24 01:41 pm (UTC)