Posted by Atticus on December 7, 2004, at 0:39:36
In reply to Re: Lou's reply to gardengirl- » Lou Pilder, posted by Atticus on December 6, 2004, at 23:37:55
OK, to relate all that blah blah blah in my previous post to the PB site as a whole, to formally accuse someone of libel, first someone (most likely a judge) would have to determine whether this site is one that a "reasonable person" would view as a forum whose purpose is primarily the sharing of opinions. Not such an easy task, as far as I can see. Then second, the nature of the post would have to be examined. Even if this site were to be deemed primarily an aggregation of opinions, and most posters understood it to be so, poster "X" still could not come out and say poster "Y" was a pedophile or something equally unlawful and vile. Poster Y could sue poster X's posterior off and, as a private citizen, would likely win. Dr. Bob would be a big loser in this scenario, too, as someone who repeats or publishes a libelous statement is considered, under the law, as guilty of libel as the person who originally said it. It's called the "Republication rule." However, if X said that Y was a "an abrasive knucklehead," such a statement would almost certainly be judged opinion, and if this is considered an opinion forum, Y would lose if he sued and end up paying X's court costs to boot. My observations lead me to believe that most infractions that draw PBCs or blocks fall into the latter category. They're putdowns, not factual statements accusing someone of malfeasance. (The "dirty words" thing is another matter altogether; just something Bob insists on and that I disagree with, and we "agreed to disagree" on that matter ages ago.) Bottom line: I don't remember ever reading anything that would hold up in a court of law as libel on PB. Make sense? No? Tough. Atticus
poster:Atticus
thread:423270
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041109/msgs/425505.html