Originally Posted by
Detale
Slander eh, pretty sure it would be libel I think because it was broadcast over the interwebs but I'm no lawyer. Who knows you could in fact be a Nazi how would anyone prove this not to be true?? So there is no defamation here ,no losses of any kind due to his inappropriate statements. PTN is a fine enough tracker and as I said he just comes across as disgruntled
Slightly off topic (not like this topic is worth salvaging anyway), but as a (former) lawyer I feel compelled to correct a misstatement on the law
You're right that it would be libel, not slander. However, you're mistaken as to both the burden and standard of proof required to prove defamation. The test would be whether the writer/publisher had a good reason to believe that he was a Nazi, and it would be up to the writer/publisher to prove either that he good reason or that the statement is actually true. Still, the main problem with a defamation claim would be showing that a rational reader would actually believe the libelous statement (which is closely related to proving that his reputation had actually been injured). In the seminal free speech/defamation case of Hustler Magazine v. Falwell (US Supreme Court), the court found that Hustler had not defamed Falwell because the average reader could not reasonably believe that Hustler actually meant what it said (it had joked that Falwell had sex with his mother, if I remember correctly). Given the source of the Nazi comment in this thread, I think it's doubtful that a reasonable person would take him seriously
Well, that killed some time for me - class dismissed.
Bookmarks