Quote:
Originally Posted by whitearrow
An insult is not defamation. Defamation is a false statement of fact. ... Calling something pornography may be damaging, but whether something is pornography is in the eye of the beholder.
|
If Amazon has a "no pornography" rule for its books, calling something "pornography" is stating that the book violates Amazons terms for content. Proving that was a deliberate attempt to get the book removed, and that the book does not fit Amazon's criteria for "pornography," is a matter that can be supported by evidence.
I think what's likely available is closer to "a hysterical bureaucratic coverup and pass-the-buck fest" than "evidence," and Amazon and Fox both have really big scary lawyers that I wouldn't want to be up against... but maybe this is the case that could bring up the combination problem of unchecked media declarations and business reactions to those declarations.
Quote:
|
One of the elements of defamation is establishing that the alleged defamatory statement is false. How do you establish that the book isn't pornography?
|
Could establish that it is or isn't porn by Amazon's definition. If Amazon "doesn't publish pornography," they need a definition.
Quote:
|
Moreover, even if you could establish a false statement of fact, you'd need to prove causation -- that the reporter's statement directly caused Amazon to remove the book. Good luck getting someone from Amazon to admit that. (The fact that one thing followed another is not causation.)
|
Oh yeah, nightmare evidence chain. But possible, just difficult.