getting sued for defamation c/d?

Plus a Brit would probably just call it libel.

xpost - as i understand, libel means falsehood, whereas defamation means 'makes me look bad! waah!'.

The closest thing to it is a sub editor. Or sub-editor. Or subeditor. Such things are argued about at length by such people.

it's obviously very hard to comment here without knowning the full story (and the canadian legal system), but basically "defamation" here in scotland is defined as meaning (reaches into depths of memory) something along the lines of reducing a person's standing in the eyes of other right-thinking people. here in scotland, there's no legally recognised difference between "libel" and "slander", for instance: it all comes under "defamation".

as i understand, libel means falsehood, whereas defamation means 'makes me look bad! waah!'

not really. for the purposes of a defamation suit (i'm assuming canada's roughly the same) over here, all that matters is the plaintiff's perceived reduced standing. at base, it doesn't really matter what you've accused them of, whether it's true or not, or whether or not it's malicious: the fact is simply that they believe they've been defamed.

obviously, the truth/malicious intent/etc stuff comes into play as soon as you decide how to deal with it, whether privately or in court. and i can't advise you of anything here without knowing more about the case - and believe me, you do NOT want to be posting anything about the case, as you know only too well.

it's a tricky one, and i wish you well. i'd ask if there were any union/university bodies to whom you could go for assistance, but then i have a sneaking suspicion that the pursuer might well work for one of those two bodies (at least, from my own experience of student hackdom).

Don't forget

v. Low Abuse. Malicious but unspecific.

in the US the editor-in-cheif & writer would be targets of lawsuit

wouldn't they?

speaking of copy editors

i call bullshit too: the chances of the pursuer going ahead with this are minimal. but best to be prepared all the same.

grimly, i'd ask if there were any union/university bodies to whom you could go for assistance, but then i have a sneaking suspicion that the pursuer might well work for one of those two bodies (at least, from my own experience of student hackdom). touches very close to what's going on here, and i won't say any more.

thanks folks!

if the suit DOES go ahead, make sure every single newspaper in canada milks the story for everything it's worth and portrays you as risk-taking heroes of journalism etc :)

it's the student newspaper at the university in battlestar galactica, x-files, some new malcolm mcdowell show, etc.

it seems we may have a happy ending!

in a slight twist on this thread's title, i would like to defame someone in such a way that either does not result in my getting caught or, if i do get caught, does not result in any serious penalty to me.

any thoughts?

Following the pattern established upthread - in which country would you like to defame them?

this would be in the UK. i've had a few ideas but i'm not sure i can get away with any of them.

proxy software anonymous blog posts -- good luck!

just make sure you don't leave any kind of internet messageboard trail

why would you want to defame someone? Is it rooney?

I would like to defame my unscrupulous former landlord who has, a year after moving out, refused to give up our deposit. (Suing him for the money first btw.) He runs a major PR firm in the city and I think I would like to generate some negative PR for him.

He recently also accused me of intending to steal from him, then when I asked him to retract that accusation, screamed SHUT THE FUCK UP x 10 at me down the phone and called me a cunt.

I'm not so worried about the ilx trail at the moment tbh.

are you planning to make false claims?

pls mention my former landlord at the same time, thx

xp nope. although I'm led to believe that doesn't necessarily matter.

that said, I'd like to go beyond facts and do a bit of character smearing, if possible.

Has he given a reason for not giving up the deposit?

From a range of perspectives, it's best to have the court case settled before embarking on a spree of character assassination.

Absolutely, I just want to be prepared for after we win. He has given no reason for not giving back the deposit and has been stalling and making false promises, in writing and over the phone, for months.

If he was *just* a dick I might be inclined to move on and chalk it up to experience, but he pertains to be a respectable city professional when he is, in fact, a despicable human being deserving of a world of pain imo.

It would be pretty hard to do anonymously. If you win the case and keep any statements about him factual, that'll have a damaging impact on his reputation but not be legally actionable. He might try to sue but he wouldn't have any grounds for doing so.

no expert but that sounds pretty solid from the upthread info and what i've seen in the good wife

my first idea was to run google advertising against his and his company's name calling him a "see you next tuesday" (literally - I've tried this before and Google allows it) but I think that could get me into a lot of trouble, although i could configure it so he couldn't see the ad. My second thought was to negatively blog about him and optimise the bejeesus out of it in the manner of the current second listed Google result for "hmrc".

I realise both of these are very childish but this is the "industry" that i'm in and the tools i have.

this is a terrible idea

i don't get it. you're suing him for the money. if you win then job done. if you lose then you are, ipso facto, almost certainly going to be libelling him.

this does seem rather like it could backfire quite badly - is he worth the potential repercussions on you or people you're responsible to?

iatee, i largely agree. i'm in a vindictive mood though and feel that he deserves a bit of a kicking for the stress and huge amount of hassle he's putting us through.

re: if you win then job done. if you lose then you are, ipso facto, almost certainly going to be libelling him.

yeah, I know I should just wash my hands of it but if we "win", the most we get is the deposit back back which, you can presumably understand, hardly feels like justice. ultimately i'm this is just going to have been a thought experiment and will almost certainly not be actually realised, because i don't want to create more hassle for myself, but i have time at the moment to play with it, so that's what i'm doing.

I would like to defame my unscrupulous former landlord who has, a year after moving out, refused to give up our deposit.

if you are only going to be saying things about the landlord that are demonstrably true then you would not be defaming anyone.