'Defamation of Character' ???????

Question

Need a legitimate definition of this phrase. Also, what are my limitations (i.e. how far can I go with mud-slinging) before I am in violation of this?

Answer 1

Defamation is written or spoken injury to a person or organization's reputation. Libel is the written act of defamation, vs. slander, the oral act of defamation.
Generally, a statement made about an undefinable group of people or organizations cannot be defamation. Take, "Real estate agents are crooks." It's defamatory enough, but there is no identifiable victim.

"Most of the agents at Smith Real Estate Company are crooks" is getting dicier, but it is still hard to define the victim.

Defamation of character is notoriously difficult to prove in court, although the actual effects can be quite evident and damaging. If a disgruntled customer of a restaurant tells numerous people that the head chef has AIDS, for example, sales for that restaurant could fall and the employee might lose his job or find it difficult to work. Because the customer's slanderous statement concerns a specific person and an unproven accusation, the chef may have a legitimate case of defamation of character.

The main problem with proving defamation of character is the protection of free speech guaranteed by the First Amendment. Courts generally agree that an opinion, no matter how malicious, is not the same as a stated fact. If the disgruntled customer had said "Don't eat at Joe's Cafe. I think the food is lousy and the chef is sick," then defamation of character would be difficult to prove. Other people can still form different opinions. Once the customer said "Don't eat at Joe's Cafe. I know the chef and he has AIDS," then a statement of fact has occurred and a claim of defamation of character can be pursued.

Another problem concerning defamation of character is the actual truth of the statement. Some may argue that in order for defamation of character to occur, the alleged victim actually has to have character to defame in the first place. Calling a known neighborhood bully a 'thug' in the local paper wouldn't qualify as defamation of character, because it isn't a statement against fact. The truth is, the truthfulness of the statement isn't always a factor in actual court proceedings. In our hypothetical case, the court would assume the chef does not in fact have AIDS and the defendant knew this at the time the statements were made.

Very few defamation of character lawsuits actually reach the level of a court trial. Many are settled privately, in order to avoid even more damage from publicity. Since actual damages must be demonstrated, some cases are dismissed because the statements or accusations do not rise to the level of actual slander or libel. Hurt feelings or a loss of social standing may not reach the legal definition of damages. What few defamation of character cases do reach the court system are usually local in nature, such as a city councilman suing his local newspaper for implying he accepted a bribe.

In our case of the chef and the disgruntled customer, damages could most likely be demonstrated by restaurant sales records and testimony from other customers who heard the slanderous statements firsthand. Even if medical tests revealed that the chef did indeed have a medical condition, that fact alone would not mitigate the customer's obvious malicious intent. The customer was not working in the public's best interest at the time. Under these circumstances, the court would most likely find in favor of the plaintiff and order the defendant to pay punitive damages.

This is generally the same legal mechanism which allows celebrities to successfully sue tabloid publications. A truthful but malicious statement can still be considered defamation of character under the right circumstances.

Answer 2

What Lindakflo said.....

If you have a gripe against an individual or a company handle it in a non personal and factual manner.

Outline the facts in writing and what you would like to see as a resolution with an opening to allow some movement on a resolution.

If you go slagging off all you do is leave the door wide open for them to shaft you even harder with no comeback.

If you want limitations , think about what you would tolerate about what people would say about you, true or not , before you got riled. Thats your limitation...

Answer 3

It's my understanding that you cannot say anything untrue about a person. And you cannot say anything that would hurt their business or income. I would think that would extend to saying things about their family as well.

Most places like yahoo, ebay, msn, aol, etc. have policy as to what you can and can't say, and, if you are simply making a nuisance of yourself or doing anything illegal they will find a way to remove you. Of course if you are using the mail it may be considered a federal offense just because they are federal.

Judges and people are just tired of the bullying and new laws are being formed to halt people from flaming each other, talking interpersonal things, saying mean things, etc. on the internet.

If someone says to you they are suing you for defamation of character, they probably are, and are warning you to stop saying what you're saying. That in itself should put up a red flag for you to stop doing what you're doing. Or if a person merely says "stop".

Answer 4

.......... its when someone lies about a person
and hurts their credibility ....
its sad and not fair to the victim
Legally there not suposed to do it either
but fighting it in court would be a waste of tiime.....
if you lied about someone Try to set things right because and speak all the good you can of peeople thats what ben franklin says.

......I had my heart broke over vicious mud slinging....
i don't think anyone really thought that whatthey were saying would have snowballed...but thats the nature of rumors
...but I know that things will get better and snowballs melt....it work out ......I have faith in myself I know that I can rise above it.....You also have to forgive them. Most people only say stuff because they don't know you good enough but once they get to know you then they will like you and the more they like you then the rumors will dissapear..........And then even the people who sprouted the rumors will admiit their mistake....because I don't think anybiody would really want someone to suffer and be so sad because of some idle gossip that went to far.......

Just think there are movie stars and politicans ....they have people saying all kinds of crap about them ....It doesn't bother them they just keep on doing their job so thats what you should do....and also .what you need to do is talk to people who are gossiping and then they will llike you more and more as they realize your a good person....thats what I learned.....and thats what lifes aboiut learning.....you take what you learned you suck it up and you become stronger.....and you learn from your experiences,,,,so it won't happen again..... So if your friendlier towards people then they will like you more and more and say good things and be good to you.....Thats what my mother said to me and she is right....

Answer 5

That is a legal term usually used to indicate wrongful characterization of a person or entity to the masses . Also to speak bad of someones character to a person or persons who may be in judgement of them .
I hope I explained that clearly enough . If not you could try wikipedia .

Answer 6

the element that is going on right it extremely is your husband's lady pal is utilising the youngsters against you. they are being performed like pawns. it extremely is something you do no longer choose for to do, is pit the youngsters against the two your ex or her. as much as you may hire an lawyer, there is extremely little foundation for "suing" her. the final element which you will do is take a seat down inclusive of your infants and communicate with them, enable them to be attentive to which you and their father love them no remember what. you should additionally attempt to talk on your ex husband, and enable him be attentive to how aggravating it extremely is on your infants. curiously as though she is attempting to cause them to choose for between you and her and your ex. in case you and your ex can social gathering inclusive of your infants, without the lady pal present, and the two considered one of you clarify on your infants which you the two love them, and that only because of the fact issues did no longer paintings out between mom and dad, that does no longer mean that the two considered one of you like them any much less. that may no longer a case of battling hearth with hearth. this might nicely be a case of battling hearth with water, in different words, do no longer decrease your self to her point. finally CPS will report expenditures against her if she maintains to report fake courtroom situations approximately your infants. they do no longer take those concerns gently. stable success.