Re: Libel on RMA

On Dec 23, 6:59 am, Renli <oliver.rich...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
With all this talk of libel on RMA, which I find interesting, I
thought it deserved its own thread.  To my understanding, to consitute
that something in writing is libel it must meet the following
criteria:

1.  It must be made to someone else:  Any posting to RMA meets this
criteria as it is available to a large number of people.

2.  It must be the type that generally affects reputation

like "you sir are a ***"

3.  It must in fact affect reputation

like "you sir, oliver, are a ***"

4.  It must be a false statement

This is the one that makes my statement a safe one to make.

5.  It must not be an opinion

This one also makes my statement safe.

As I see it, meeting all the criteria for a libel case on RMA is very
difficult, especially #3 above.  Since there is so much flaming on
RMA, it would be very difficult to prove that a statement on RMA
actually affected someone's reputation in the eyes of others.

In point, such a statement would have to be made by a person who had
established their credibility ahead of time - say, as a scientist or a
doctor - who posted under their real name, and who mentioned someone's
real name or otherwise referred to someone's real name and/or
business, in order to be adequate. This is what I've found.

I'd like to note in particular that every single successful libel suit
on the internet had something to do not with the person directly, but
with some sort of "business" thing that the person was doing. For
example the well-known internet case where some woman in florida had
an online business and sued some idiot on usenet for millions of
dollars.

Like Kirk for example - he sells books on lulu. So do I. Or, teaching
Go, for example. Or, selling things on e-bay. What would happen if I,
for example, suffered unfairly as a result of "accidentally" doing
business with someone who used to post on R.M-A - someone who rarely
if ever posts but is known to read the NG? Well in that particular
case it's a good thing I didn't actually get ripped off in the end,
although it was quite a headache to deal with that loser during the
dispute process. Well, that's why laws exist. Because if you break
them, you get shut down quick - like, you know, what really happened
to Ketho. For those that know.

-

three cases come to mind of me meeting people who were previously
aware of my statements on rma.
obviously ive probably come into contact with many more aware of them,
but three made it known.
In any of these cases were i to care much about what they thought it
would make me a woman.
that word is chosen carefully as its very feminine to dwell on ones
reputation in my eyes.
i mean i guess there could be ways it could affect a mans income or
family, then i suppose it would not be too out of the question for a
man whos not a compete punkass bitch to care.
but for a man to go to a lawyer and say "wahh i want his money case he
said hurtful things online" must be hugely humbling.
i would think that to any reasonable man that VERY little that could
be said or written about sonmeone could hurt his reputation more than
running to a lawayer over words on a website.Id rather walk thru
centrel park in a dress or wear my mr spock ears to strurgess bike
week that sue someone over my "reputation"
in suing, one is bending over and inserting penis.they are very
similar.

I can honestly tell you this.
If i was to hear that a seriel killer like john wayne gacy, or a
terrorist like the 9-11 hijackers sued someone cause of what was said
or written about them....I can honestly say that id think less of
them.
I think many people would.
.

Loading