Quote:
Originally Posted by christiangirl
Isn't that half a dozen in one hand and 6 in the other?  |
I never said that your information was wrong. I said that you confused libel w/ slander.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kevin
I guess you've never heard of a false light. Portraying him as a rapist casts him in a false light and can cause him injury. ....If it's made regarding a private person, there's no requirement for malice
|
ETA: I found my notes from my Law of Mass Comm class....so I changed my post.
In a false light case, they still would have to prove malice. For false light, the information need to not defamatory, only embarrasing and they have to be able to prove 2 things. 1. That the false information was highly offensive to a reasonable person and 2. that the publisher (in this case the creator of the group) was at fault exhibiting either malice or negligence. Because of a ruling in 1967, this guy would have to be required to prove fault in any false light case.