View Single Post
Old 01-07-2011, 07:09 PM   #451
whitearrow
Guru
whitearrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.whitearrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.whitearrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.whitearrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.whitearrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.whitearrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.whitearrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.whitearrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.whitearrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.whitearrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.whitearrow ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 808
Karma: 2260766
Join Date: Apr 2008
Device: Kindle Oasis 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew H. View Post
@Whitearrow

Very good post. But it's even hard to prove than that - because the "defamation" is about jamthecat's book, he is almost certainly a "public figure" (or a "limited purpose public figure,"), meaning that a claim of defamation will only lie if he can prove "actual malice."
I thought about that, but it didn't seem completely clear to me. Limited public figure is more likely. But again, this highlights the issue that the statements made and the controversy are about the book, not personal to the author.

I also question whether calling something pornography in this day and age is actually defamatory. The same question has been arising over the past few years as to whether calling someone gay is defamatory.
whitearrow is offline