Guest guest Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 The U.S. has laws are similar to the Canadian ones previously posted. Fear of legal liability should never prevent one from presenting opinion (even if not widely held) or fact, provided you can back up what you say with factual evidence if necessary. In certain situations, even if faced with legal action, I believe in speaking truth to power to right wrongs, however this certainly does not include the act of defamation of individuals or businesses without good reason. The most important defense to an action for defamation is " truth " , which is an absolute defense to an action for defamation. If what you say about someone can be proven as factual, then there is no case for defamation. IOW, if you accuse someone of breaking the laws or rules, make sure they actually are. A defense recognized in most jurisdictions is " opinion " . If the person makes a statement of opinion as opposed to fact, the statement may not support a cause of action for defamation. Whether a statement is viewed as an expression of fact or opinion can depend upon context - that is, whether or not the person making the statement would be perceived by the community as being in a position to know whether or not it is true. Some jurisdictions have eliminated the distinction between fact and opinion, and instead hold that any statement that suggests a factual basis can support a cause of action for defamation. A defense similar to opinion is " fair comment on a matter of public interest " . If the mayor of a town is involved in a corruption scandal, expressing the opinion that you believe the allegations are true is not likely to support a cause of action for defamation. Then there is the whole 'public figure' aspect, which means we can say pretty much what we want about politicians, actors, musicians, writers, and, of course, Paris Hilton. :-) Be Well, Marcia Elston, Samara Botane/Nature Intelligence http://www.wingedseed.com http://www.wingedseed.blogspot.com http://www.aromaconnection.org " We make a living by what we get. We make a life by what we give. " - Winston Churchill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 27, 2010 Report Share Posted February 27, 2010 If one posts that a you didn't like the oils of a certain company, it smelled bad, it irritated you, etc., this is not grounds for libel, defamation or slander. If one posts that a certain company's oils are adultrated, aren't pure, aren't processed correctly and so on, this can be acted upon legally because that person is stating something which could defame the company, cause economic harm, etc., because it's going beyond a personal opinion. Even if it's true. However, they stand a better chance if they make a complaint against the company. It can be a slippery slope though. I've worked in a lawfirm for over 20 years and while I'm not a lawyer, I have been privy to cases like these. Mostly the libel, slander and defamation claims piggyback on with other claims, so you'll seldom see it buy itself. If a person goes on a website and posts a bunch of negative stuff about someone, depending on the nature of those posts, they can be sued for defamation of character, though it has to be proven with evidence that the person was defamed, harassed, harmed by the act. But there are catches. If the person produces emails showing a person calling someone a bunch of negative names or trying to humiliate them, it really is left up to the discretion of the judge because the defendant can produce posts showing that the plaintiff behaved in a similar fashion to them or others. Not much is going to come of that. They are too hard to prove. The 80s are dead, so you won't find too many lawyers willing to take contingency cases or pro bonos. Nasty words on a weblog isn't going to spur too many attorneys into action. Now, if the person goes to a number of websites and posts negative things against a person or company, it could look more like harassment and defamation. But these cases can drag on for years and most people and small companies don't have the money to fight these types of legal battles unless they want to go to small claims court. One thing I do know about the aromatherapy field is people have no problems vocalizing their opinions. There is so much b.s. in the health field that some of the claims these companies, schools and people make kind of ask for others to challenge them and their claims. In selling essential oils, I've spent more time having to educate people and honestly, I don't sell a lot of essential oils because it amazes me how many people don't even know what they are. And I have gotten people who ask me " are these therapeutic grade? " and they think I'm b.s.ing them when I say there's no such thing because they've had companies like Young Living educating them or introducing them. They are so brainwashed that they don't want to hear anything to the contrary although they admit they have down little or no research outside of what someone's told them. I think if a criticism is fair, even if a personal opinion, then I think it should be addressed. Chaeya ATFE , " Marcia Elston " <Marcia wrote: > > The U.S. has laws are similar to the Canadian ones previously posted. Fear > of legal liability should never prevent one from presenting opinion (even if > not widely held) or fact, provided you can back up what you say with factual > evidence if necessary. In certain situations, even if faced with legal > action, I believe in speaking truth to power to right wrongs, however this > certainly does not include the act of defamation of individuals or > businesses without good reason. > > The most important defense to an action for defamation is " truth " , which is > an absolute defense to an action for defamation. If what you say about > someone can be proven as factual, then there is no case for defamation. > IOW, if you accuse someone of breaking the laws or rules, make sure they > actually are. > > A defense recognized in most jurisdictions is " opinion " . If the person makes > a statement of opinion as opposed to fact, the statement may not support a > cause of action for defamation. Whether a statement is viewed as an > expression of fact or opinion can depend upon context - that is, whether or > not the person making the statement would be perceived by the community as > being in a position to know whether or not it is true. Some jurisdictions > have eliminated the distinction between fact and opinion, and instead hold > that any statement that suggests a factual basis can support a cause of > action for defamation. > > A defense similar to opinion is " fair comment on a matter of public > interest " . If the mayor of a town is involved in a corruption scandal, > expressing the opinion that you believe the allegations are true is not > likely to support a cause of action for defamation. > > Then there is the whole 'public figure' aspect, which means we can say > pretty much what we want about politicians, actors, musicians, writers, and, > of course, Paris Hilton. :-) > > Be Well, > Marcia Elston, Samara Botane/Nature Intelligence > http://www.wingedseed.com > http://www.wingedseed.blogspot.com > http://www.aromaconnection.org > " We make a living by what we get. We make a life by what we give. " - Winston > Churchill > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.