Chilling Effects
Home Weather Reports Report Receiving a Cease and Desist Notice Search the Database Topics
Sending
Topic HomeFAQsMonitoring the legal climate for Internet activity
USF Law School - IIP Justice Project
 Chilling Effects Clearinghouse > Protest, Parody and Criticism Sites > Notices > Defamation Abroad (NoticeID 17987, http://chillingeffects.org/N/17987) Printer-friendly version

Defamation Abroad

March 26, 2008

 

Sender Information:
[Private]
Sent by: NULL
[Private]
NULL

San Francisco, CA, USA

Recipient Information:
NULL

NULL

Antigua, Guatemala


Sent via: email
Re: My own attorney who solicits penny stock business threatens me for investigating them

Lawsuit
[Private]
show details Mar 27 (2 days ago) Reply


[Private],
I am in the process of filing an action against you for defamation relating to the posting campaign you have been carrying out. I have already sent you the entire file, including all documents pulled from the LA Court nearly
four years ago. It is not my responsibility to maintain your email
accounts.

If you remove all defamatory postings, I will withdraw the action and,
request that my filing agent again pull the file on the action in LA Court.
Your emails usually get blocked by the spam filter, so if you wish to
communicate with me, my number is below.


Law Offices of
[Private]


............................................
[Private]

 
FAQ: Questions and Answers

[back to notice text]


Question: What is jurisdiction?

Answer: Jurisdiction refers generally to the authorities who have legal power over you, or, where you could be sued. As a general matter, you can only be subject to the laws of the place where you are present or doing business. Mere publishing of a website, although it may be readable everywhere, does not make you subject to every state and country's law, but if your site offers business transactions with residents of a given state, you may be held to have "purposely availed" yourself of its laws and thus consented to its jurisdiction.


[back to notice text]


Question: What is the legal definition of defamation?

Answer: The elements that must be proved to establish defamation are: (1) A publication to one other than the person defamed; (2) of a false statement of fact; (3) which is understood as being of and concerning the plaintiff; and (4) which is understood in such a way as to tend to harm the reputation of plaintiff.


[back to notice text]


Question: What are the elements of a defamation claim?

Answer: The party making a defamation claim (plaintiff) must ordinarily prove four elements:

  1. a publication to one other than the person defamed;
  2. a false statement of fact;
  3. that is understood as
  4. a. being of and concerning the plaintiff; and
    b. tending to harm the reputation of plaintiff.
  5. If the plaintiff is a public figure, he or she must also prove actual malice.


[back to notice text]


Question: What is the "publication" of a defamatory statement?

Answer: Publication is the dissemination of the defamatory statement to any person other than the person about whom the statement is written or spoken.


[back to notice text]


Question: How does the First Amendment to the Constitution affect defamation?

Answer: The free speech guarantees under the Constitution protect certain speech and commentary. The degree of protection generally depends on whether the person commented about is a private or public figure and whether the statement is regarding a private or public matter. According to the New York Times rule (from the case New York Times v. Sullivan), when the plaintiff is a public figure and the matter is one of public concern, the plaintiff must prove "malice" or "reckless disregard" on the part of the defendant. If both parties are private individuals, there is less protection for the speech because the plaintiff only needs to prove negligence.


[back to notice text]


Question: What defenses may be available to someone who is sued for defamation?

Answer: There are ordinarily 6 possible defenses available to a defendant who is sued for libel (published defamatory communication.)
1. Truth. This is a complete defense, but may be difficult to prove.
2. Fair comment on a matter of public interest. This defense applies to "opinion" only, as compared to a statement of fact. The defendant usually needs to prove that the opinion is honestly held and the comments were not motivated by actual "malice." ( Malice means knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth of falsity of the defamatory statement.)
3. Privilege. The privilege may be absolute or qualified. Privilege generally exists where the speaker or writer has a duty to communicate to a specific person or persons on a given occasion. In some cases the privilege is qualified and may be lost if the publication is unnecessarily wide or made with malice.
4. Consent. This is rarely available, as plaintiffs will not ordinarily agree to the publication of statements that they find offensive.
5. Innocent dissemination. In some caes a party who has no knowledge of the content of a defamatory statement may use this defense. For example, a mailman who delivers a sealed envelope containing a defamatory statement, is not legally liable for any damages that come about from the statement.
6. Plaintiff's poor reputation. Defendant can mitigate (lessen) damages for a defamatory statement by proving that the plaintiff did not have a good reputation to begin with. Defendant ordinarily can prove plaintiff's poor reputation by calling witnesses with knowledge of the plaintiff's prior reputation relating to the defamatory content.


Topic maintained by USF Law School - IIP Justice Project

Topic Frequently Asked Questions (and Answers)
Chilling Effects Clearinghouse - www.chillingeffects.org
disclaimer / privacy / about us & contacts