Originally posted by Astner
You're free to propagate the rumor but you might be charged for libel.
if someone gave false testimony, yes they could be charged with libel. but to suggest that you could get charged for expressing an opinion on later debunked testimony is pure internet bullshit.
is AC paying you to be a false-legal-threat showpony here or did you volunteer?
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
if someone gave false testimony, yes they could be charged with libel. but to suggest that you could get charged for expressing an opinion on later debunked testimony is pure internet bullshit.
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
is AC paying you to be a false-legal-threat showpony here or did you volunteer?
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
if someone gave false testimony, yes they could be charged with libel. but to suggest that you could get charged for expressing an opinion on later debunked testimony is pure internet bullshit.is AC paying you to be a false-legal-threat showpony here or did you volunteer?
1. It's definitely not libel, in this situation, because pretty much every accusation thrown at AC has been true. So my next point doesn't even matter.
2. It most certainly counts as libel (written) or slander (spoken) if the person maliciously attacks a person's reputation, falsely, and it can be demonstrated that said reputation was genuinely harmed. This is like...high school understanding of these things. Not sure why this is even being discussed.
Edit -
Side point #3: note that I am not necessarily disagreeing with you. But if your point was different than what I stated above, I was disagreeing with you. If it was the same, we are just chums.
Originally posted by The Renegade
No kidding. However, they're usually banned. I know, proxies and all that but constant banning is a deterrent from spreading that kind of disgusting material.
Originally posted by dadudemon
1. It's definitely not libel, in this situation, because pretty much every accusation thrown at AC has been true. So my next point doesn't even matter.2. It most certainly counts as libel (written) or slander (spoken) if the person maliciously attacks a person's reputation, falsely, and it can be demonstrated that said reputation was genuinely harmed. This is like...high school understanding of these things. Not sure why this is even being discussed.
Edit -
Side point #3: note that I am not necessarily disagreeing with you. But if your point was different than what I stated above, I was disagreeing with you. If it was the same, we are just chums.
yes a person who makes a false testimony can be charged with libel.
but that doesn't mean that the same applies to anyone else who replies to that testimony with "wow that's messed up that he did that".
I think we're agreeing...are we?