IS this defamation Character?

Question

If you have a blog and you write things that somebody has done without referring to them by name or as your brother, sister, mother, friend, etc...can you be held liable for defamation of character even if the things that are written are true?

Answer 1

Even if you wrote all of those things in a blog and use their names, you won't be held liable, if you can prove that the statements are true. Also, no one can win a defamation claim with out proving that they were harmed in some way by the untrue statements. Often this is really hard to prove, the statements have to have a negative impact on personal relationships, career, or similar aspects that caused an actual "injury" to the plaintiff so that damages could be awarded. Considering that you aren't even naming a name AND the statements are true, you have nothing to worry about. Rant away!

Answer 2

The term defamation of character is often used to describe accusations of slander, libel or both. Slander involves verbal derogatory statements, while libel involves written ones. In a court of law, the plaintiff pursuing the lawsuit would charge defamation of character to cover any form of false or damaging allegations.

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 3

Truth is one of the primary defenses against defamation. In fact, if a statement is made and the statement is truth then there can be no defamation

Answer 4

If the things written about them are true, this is not defamation of character.

Answer 5

the truth is a perfect defense of defamation of character.

Answer 6

the component that is going at this is your husband's female pal is making use of the toddlers against you. they are being performed like pawns. it particularly is something you do no longer % to do, is pit the toddlers against the two your ex or her. as much as you could % to hire an lawyer, there is particularly little foundation for "suing" her. the main suitable component so which you could do is take a seat which comprise your toddlers and talk with them, enable them to renowned which you and their father love them no count what. you may additionally attempt to chat on your ex husband, and permit him understand how demanding this is on your toddlers. evidently as though she is making an attempt to cause them to % between you and her and your ex. in case you and your ex can party which comprise your toddlers, devoid of the female pal recent, and the two one in each of you clarify on your toddlers which you the two love them, and that only because of the fact issues did no longer artwork out between mom and pa, that would not advise that the two one in each of you like them any much less. this is not any longer a case of struggling with hearth with hearth. this is a case of struggling with hearth with water, in different words, do no longer decrease your self to her point. at last CPS will report fees against her if she maintains to report fake lawsuits approximately your toddlers. they do no longer take those concerns gently. good success.

Answer 7

If it is the truth and you use no names it is quite legal. Even if you use names they cannot do anything legal against you .You will just loose friends.

Answer 8

No, because everybody knows that blogs carry people's opinions and ralely represent facts.

.

Answer 9

without a name attached, who is to say it is not writings about a fictional charactor.

Answer 10

I think not