Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
UPS supervisors think their the all mighty?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="cheryl" data-source="post: 821613" data-attributes="member: 1"><p>Tie,</p><p> </p><p>You are going to sue me for putting a virus on your computer? Wow.</p><p> </p><p>So now you are purposely posting a lie to demean me and damage the reputation of my website where I am known by my real name, and you are anonymous.</p><p> </p><p>From wikipedia:</p><p> </p><p>A person who destroys another's reputation may be referred to as a <strong>famacide</strong>, <strong>defamer</strong>, or <strong>slanderer</strong>. The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">Latin</span></a> phrase <em><strong>famosus libellus</strong></em> means a libelous writing.</p><p> </p><p>How to prove libel</p><p>There are several ways a person must go about proving that libel has taken place. For example, in the United States, the person first must prove that the statement was false. Second, that person must prove that the statement caused harm. And, third, they must prove that the statement was made without adequate research into the truthfulness of the statement. These steps are for an ordinary citizen. In the case of a celebrity or public official trying to prove libel, they must prove the first three steps, and must (in the United States) prove the statement was made with the intent to do harm, or with reckless disregard for the truth.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation#cite_note-16" target="_blank">[17]</a></p><p> </p><p>or</p><p> </p><p><strong>False light</strong> is a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">legal</span></a> term that refers to a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tort" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">tort</span></a> concerning <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">privacy</span></a> that is similar to the tort of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0b0080">defamation</span></a>. The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_laws_in_the_United_States" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">privacy laws in the United States</span></a> include a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_figure" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">non-public person's</span></a> right to privacy from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publicity" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">publicity</span></a> which puts them in a false light to the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">public</span></a>; which is balanced against the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">First Amendment</span></a> right of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">free speech</span></a>.</p><p>False light differs from defamation primarily in being intended "to protect the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaintiff" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">plaintiff</span></a>'s <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">mental</span></a> or <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotion" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">emotional</span></a> well-being" rather than protect a plaintiff's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reputation" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">reputation</span></a> as is the case with the tort of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0b0080">defamation</span></a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_light#cite_note-martin-0" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">[1]</span></a> and in being about the impression created rather than being about true or false. If a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publication" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">publication</span></a> of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">information</span></a> is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">false</span></a>, then a tort of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0b0080">defamation</span></a> might have occurred. If that <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communication" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">communication</span></a> is not <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technicality" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">technically</span></a> false but is still <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misleading" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">misleading</span></a> then a tort of false light might have occurred.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p></p><p>"False light privacy claims often arise under the same facts as defamation cases, and therefore not all states recognize false light actions. There is a subtle difference in the way courts view the legal theories -- false light cases are about damage to a person's personal feelings or dignity, whereas defamation is about damage to a person's reputation."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_light#cite_note-1" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">[2]</span></a>"The specific elements of the Tort of FALSE LIGHT vary considerably even among those <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisdiction" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">jurisdictions</span></a> which do recognize this Tort. Generally, these elements consist of the following: <ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">A publication by the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defendant" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">Defendant</span></a> about the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaintiff" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">Plaintiff</span></a>;</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">made with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actual_malice" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">actual malice</span></a> (very similar to that type required by <em><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._Sullivan" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">New York Times v. Sullivan</span></a></em> in "Defamation" cases);</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">which places the Plaintiff in a false light; AND</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">that would be <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">highly offensive</span></a> (i.e., <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embarrassment" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">embarrassing</span></a> to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_person" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">reasonable persons</span></a>).<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_light#cite_note-martin-0" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0645ad">[1]</span></a></li> </ol></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="cheryl, post: 821613, member: 1"] Tie, You are going to sue me for putting a virus on your computer? Wow. So now you are purposely posting a lie to demean me and damage the reputation of my website where I am known by my real name, and you are anonymous. From wikipedia: A person who destroys another's reputation may be referred to as a [B]famacide[/B], [B]defamer[/B], or [B]slanderer[/B]. The [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin"][COLOR=#0645ad]Latin[/COLOR][/URL] phrase [I][B]famosus libellus[/B][/I] means a libelous writing. How to prove libel There are several ways a person must go about proving that libel has taken place. For example, in the United States, the person first must prove that the statement was false. Second, that person must prove that the statement caused harm. And, third, they must prove that the statement was made without adequate research into the truthfulness of the statement. These steps are for an ordinary citizen. In the case of a celebrity or public official trying to prove libel, they must prove the first three steps, and must (in the United States) prove the statement was made with the intent to do harm, or with reckless disregard for the truth.[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation#cite_note-16"][17][/URL] or [B]False light[/B] is a [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal"][COLOR=#0645ad]legal[/COLOR][/URL] term that refers to a [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tort"][COLOR=#0645ad]tort[/COLOR][/URL] concerning [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy"][COLOR=#0645ad]privacy[/COLOR][/URL] that is similar to the tort of [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation"][COLOR=#0b0080]defamation[/COLOR][/URL]. The [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_laws_in_the_United_States"][COLOR=#0645ad]privacy laws in the United States[/COLOR][/URL] include a [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_figure"][COLOR=#0645ad]non-public person's[/COLOR][/URL] right to privacy from [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publicity"][COLOR=#0645ad]publicity[/COLOR][/URL] which puts them in a false light to the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public"][COLOR=#0645ad]public[/COLOR][/URL]; which is balanced against the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution"][COLOR=#0645ad]First Amendment[/COLOR][/URL] right of [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech"][COLOR=#0645ad]free speech[/COLOR][/URL]. False light differs from defamation primarily in being intended "to protect the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaintiff"][COLOR=#0645ad]plaintiff[/COLOR][/URL]'s [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind"][COLOR=#0645ad]mental[/COLOR][/URL] or [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotion"][COLOR=#0645ad]emotional[/COLOR][/URL] well-being" rather than protect a plaintiff's [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reputation"][COLOR=#0645ad]reputation[/COLOR][/URL] as is the case with the tort of [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation"][COLOR=#0b0080]defamation[/COLOR][/URL][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_light#cite_note-martin-0"][COLOR=#0645ad][1][/COLOR][/URL] and in being about the impression created rather than being about true or false. If a [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publication"][COLOR=#0645ad]publication[/COLOR][/URL] of [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information"][COLOR=#0645ad]information[/COLOR][/URL] is [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False"][COLOR=#0645ad]false[/COLOR][/URL], then a tort of [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation"][COLOR=#0b0080]defamation[/COLOR][/URL] might have occurred. If that [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communication"][COLOR=#0645ad]communication[/COLOR][/URL] is not [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technicality"][COLOR=#0645ad]technically[/COLOR][/URL] false but is still [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misleading"][COLOR=#0645ad]misleading[/COLOR][/URL] then a tort of false light might have occurred. "False light privacy claims often arise under the same facts as defamation cases, and therefore not all states recognize false light actions. There is a subtle difference in the way courts view the legal theories -- false light cases are about damage to a person's personal feelings or dignity, whereas defamation is about damage to a person's reputation."[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_light#cite_note-1"][COLOR=#0645ad][2][/COLOR][/URL]"The specific elements of the Tort of FALSE LIGHT vary considerably even among those [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisdiction"][COLOR=#0645ad]jurisdictions[/COLOR][/URL] which do recognize this Tort. Generally, these elements consist of the following:[LIST=1] [*]A publication by the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defendant"][COLOR=#0645ad]Defendant[/COLOR][/URL] about the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaintiff"][COLOR=#0645ad]Plaintiff[/COLOR][/URL]; [*]made with [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actual_malice"][COLOR=#0645ad]actual malice[/COLOR][/URL] (very similar to that type required by [I][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._Sullivan"][COLOR=#0645ad]New York Times v. Sullivan[/COLOR][/URL][/I] in "Defamation" cases); [*]which places the Plaintiff in a false light; AND [*]that would be [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality"][COLOR=#0645ad]highly offensive[/COLOR][/URL] (i.e., [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embarrassment"][COLOR=#0645ad]embarrassing[/COLOR][/URL] to [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_person"][COLOR=#0645ad]reasonable persons[/COLOR][/URL]).[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_light#cite_note-martin-0"][COLOR=#0645ad][1][/COLOR][/URL] [/LIST] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
UPS supervisors think their the all mighty?
Top