Defamers Beware

I was at Panera’s wai­ting for a collea­gue, taking advan­tage of the black bean soup and free wire­less, when I came upon this story about a Blog­ger jai­led in Anna Nicole Smith defa­ma­tion suit. I’m not going to dis­cuss this case, I don’t care about it except as an exam­ple of why ven­geance, stu­pi­dity, and cybers­pace should not walk hand in hand, but what is inte­res­ting to observe is the inc­rease in law­suits filed against blog­gers in the Uni­ted States.

Up to a cou­ple of hun­dred thou­sand blogs are star­ted every day, so suing blog­gers, espe­cially if they own homes and have large bank accounts, big gos­sipy mouths, and not an ounce of com­mon sense, could be quite luc­ra­tive. You can gog­gle Inter­net Defa­ma­tion and see it’s a gro­wing niche, the blog­ger ver­sion of ambu­lance cha­sers. There are also inter­net sites selling blog­gers insu­rance, capi­ta­li­zing on the fear of being sued niche. Media Blog­gers is one to those. Thanks to our advan­cing tech­no­logy we have a whole new niche, ripe for exploi­ta­tion, and it invol­ves law­yers and insu­rance. Go figure. If com­mon sense would only pre­vail we’d have none of this, but somewhere along the line someone deci­ded that free­dom of speech meant something other that what it really means, and others have spent years making money from the con­fu­sion. It’s only going to get worse.

When peo­ple start yam­me­ring all over the inter­net they might want to delay rea­ding about how to blog, how to get rea­ders, how to get com­ments, how to get links and fame, and how make money. Ins­tead, after rea­ding a few sim­ple books on basic wri­ting, go directly to What is defa­ma­tion, yes Vir­gi­nia you can in some cases be sued for your opinion.

One thing I did find at Media Blog­gers was a link to this mini course, Online Media Law, a joint pro­ject of “Media Blog­gers Asso­cia­tion; Citi­zen Media Law Pro­ject, which is jointly affi­lia­ted with Har­vard Law School’s Berk­man Cen­ter for Inter­net & Society and the Cen­ter for Citi­zen Media; City Uni­ver­sity of New York’s Gra­duate School of Jour­na­lism and Baruch College; and Media/Professional Insu­rance”, at News Uni­ver­sity. You have to sign up for News Uni­ver­sity, but it only takes two seconds, and after doing so you can enroll in the course at the bot­tom of the page. You can read through the course quickly. You can also take an assess­ment quiz before or after rea­ding through it.

The assess­ment is com­mon sense, if you don’t do well it would bene­fit you to read the course. I got 1 wrong. Erring on the side of cau­tion, I pre­su­med someone could be sued for calling someone a jerk. Hypothe­si­zing the “what if the name caller had a PhD in jerks”, not the hono­ra­ble degree in jerks that most of us think we have, but a real one, yeah lets just assume for a minute that there is such a thing. What if the Doc­tor of Jerks had a per­so­nal web­site, but his about page sta­tes his cre­den­tials and links to his autho­ri­ta­tive research on jerks. Say he calls his neigh­bor a jerk, or calls someone a jerk in the com­ments of another blog. Is he more lia­ble because of his exper­tise, even if he was just ran­ting in a non pro­fes­sio­nal way on his or someone else’s per­so­nal blog?

Gets kind of murky there for me.…

Some links:

Top Ten Rules For Limi­ting Legal Risks
Citi­zens Media Law Pro­ject
Cen­ter for Citi­zens Media
Teaching Copy­right

peace

Share This
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • SphereIt
  • Mixx
  • FriendFeed

37 Comments

  • I knew there was a rea­son I don’t blog much, at least about anything sig­ni­fi­cant. I bought my house when I was junior in college and finally have some money in the bank.

    Doc­tor of Jerks? Am I close to the edge because I unders­tand everything you write now?

    I’m going over to take that quiz. I’ll let you know how I did.

    I won’t lie. I don’t know where the line is so I stay far way from where I think it is because I’m not sure.

    jake’s last blog post..Edu­ca­tion Standards„„„„„„„„Going National

  • I sco­red well. It’s why I don’t blog, I have too many opinions.

    I almost spit out my gum on the “doc­tor of jerks,” , I then remem­be­red where I was i was — in won­der land or not. I get your point.

    i fear the com­ment too, they are fod­der for litigation.

    Temp­ted to com­ment with a sim­ple “you are a jerk” but maybe another time. Good game cooper.

  • The law­yers who used to work for the news­pa­pers … and Gene­ral Motors … had to find something to do.

    the amoeba’s last blog post..Abort, Retry, Fail … Kill?

  • It’s a good-thing my site usually only revol­ves around a select few peo­ple that all know what they’re in for. They can’t sue me because they all know how much money I have. LOL

    mojo shivers’s last blog post..And, Of Course, You Can’t Become, If You Only Say What You Would Have Done, So I Mis­sed A Million Miles Of Fun

    • You’re one of the few I can’t ima­gine anyone wan­ting to sue. Kee­ping it safe and about you is a good bet for sta­ying free from the law.

  • When I was a poli­ti­cal blog­ger that sca­red me. I fact chec­ked to death – something many peo­ple don’t know how to do. Factcheck­do­torg or wiki aren’t sour­ces. I only used them when I was lazy

    But in Ame­rica any­body can sue any­body. Though if a blog­ger beco­mes a “public figure” it should be more dif­fi­cult. How one beco­mes a “public figure” as a blog­ger hasn’t been deter­mi­ned by the courts, I think though I’m pretty sure Perez Hil­ton is I don’t know if Digby is even though he’s pic­ked up by MSM

    pia’s last blog post..Life’s a bitch

    • That “fact-checking” point is cru­cial, Pia, and you are abso­lu­tely right, few peo­ple know how to do it, and uni­ver­si­ties don’t teach it much below the Ph.D. level (crede exper­tum). I cite Wiki­pe­dia in many of my posts, but only because (a) it’s free of charge to the rea­der; (b) it’s rela­ti­vely free of endor­se­ment impli­ca­tions for the blog­ger; © it offers rea­ders an intro­duc­tion to a topic with which they may not be fami­liar (a sig­ni­fi­cant risk when I’m wri­ting). I assume that rea­ders will use that star­ting point to go for­ward, if they wish. Naïve of me, I know …

      the amoeba’s last blog post..Abort, Retry, Fail … Kill?

      • Most won’t go for­ward, but face it most peo­ple aren’t rea­ding blogs to read a dis­ser­ta­tions, and most peo­ple do not have access to much of what might be con­si­de­red good research or fact chec­king ie Uni­ver­sity library systems.

        Open source is nice but aca­de­mics fight against it in their given field, unders­tan­da­ble in some cases.

        Blogs are writ­ten quickly and usually for fun, but I can see the fun being squee­zed out of them quickly once Doug starts suing because I write that he is a smelly dog.

        If peo­ple would unders­tand that opi­nion is not fact that would be a great place to start.

    • that public figure ques­tion has such a sub­jec­tive ans­wer it is hard to tell.

  • Some day, “F**k ‘em if they can’t take a joke” will be enco­ded into law. It actually is in the second amend­ment, I think.

    Doug’s last blog post..Dissy­lla­ble

  • That line, Doug, is something uti­li­zed by Rush and Billo and Coul­ter, et als, to get around the issue of their collec­tive hate speech.

    Of course, we got to see the great result of their collec­tive words this week.

    Peo­ple some­ti­mes need a good slap upside the head. On both sides. And in between.

  • “The blog­ger ver­sion of ambu­lance cha­sers” ha ha

    It was only a mat­ter of time before this star­ted hap­pe­ning. Peo­ple will sue for a lot of things rela­ted to blogs over the next few years I bet,. Fom imper­so­na­tion ( Ste­ven Tyler), to libel, to copy­right. It should keep the law­yers in decent suits. They really need to make some laws to stop some of the more ridi­cu­lous of these because it is a waste of resour­ces, on the other hand should my wife get des­pe­rate, and want to debase her­self, she’d always have work.

    I think as an autho­rity in any field ie “pro­fes­sor of jerks” you’d have to hold your self to a higher stan­dard even when wri­ting your per­so­nal blog or com­men­ting on the blogs of others.

    jacob’s last blog post..Enjoy Your Weekend

  • The opi­nion thing is murky for me too. I know that much of what is out there is opi­nion even though I some­ti­mes see sta­te­ments made as fact with no evi­dence of fact. It’s unfor­tu­nate that facts are not chec­ked and it’s just as unfor­tu­nate that some peo­ple do not know how to express an opi­nion without making it libe­lous. The fact that it could be libe­lous to one per­son and not to another just begs for liti­ga­tion even if it is was­te­ful liti­ga­tion. That is what this country does — use­lessly litigates.

    i don’t let my 5th gra­ders use wiki­pe­dia, but I know teachers who allow it.

    kait’s last blog post..Great Ideas in Black and White

  • Com­bine lack of com­mon sense, no rea­so­ning skills, and greed and there ya go.

    That black bean soup will kill you .

    john’s last blog post..World Cup Soccer

  • So I’m gues­sing “come­dic immu­nity” is not a valid defense? Sort of like poe­tic license?

    I sup­pose I’ll have to rely on “plaintiff’s poor repu­ta­tion” along with my uncanny knack for remai­ning irrelevant.

    Bone’s last blog post..Three-thirty-one

    • That will only get you so far Bone. I sug­gest you put all your assets in my name. To pro­tect them of course.

  • A few years ago I had one com­men­ter on my blog threa­ten to sue me because I said George Bush lied about Iraq. He stal­ked me for a little while and said he would find me one day all alone and take care of me. Haven’t heard much from him in a cou­ple years. I assume he’s taking his medi­ca­tion now.

    Chris’s last blog post..What Ame­rica Is About

  • Twit­ter is having some issues too. The Cardinal’s man­ger sued Twit­ter because someone was twit­te­ring under his name and twit­ter let them.….….….trademark infrin­ge­ment, tra­de­mark dilu­tion, cybers­quat­ting, misap­pro­pria­tion of name and like­ness, inva­sion of pri­vacy, and inten­tio­nal misrepresentation.”

    g’s last blog post..I’ll Be Busy Wor­king During the Holi­day Post

  • So could I be sued for saying I think Rush Lim­baugh is a big fat bag of smelly gas?
    Per­so­nally I don’t think so because I’ve seen ima­ges on the web of big bags con­tai­ning smelly gas, and it is my opi­nion that he tends to favor it’s resem­blance very accurately.

    I hate using the same the­mes, but I do won­der if or when we threw away the unders­tan­ding that EVERYthing is someone’s opi­nion unless you have many pho­tos, videos, and loads of sup­por­ting fac­tual evi­dence to your calms.
    When did we lose this com­mon sense understanding?

    Oh Holy Lord, silly me.…

    • Well more so if your were an expert on big fat smelly gas bags.

      Oh Ben­net, where the fuck have you been. They haven’t been using facts to report the news since I star­ted rea­ding it. How can anyone expect a blog­ger to actually know or use facts.

      • coo­per, that’s only because your gene­ra­tion, and much of mine, get so much of there news online, and it is bad news.….….….….……in more ways than one.

      • I hope you know I was joking, that’s why I made a refe­rence to Rush Lim­baugh. Basi­cally many blog­gers use his the same jour­na­lis­tic methods. Read a few head­li­nes, while taking meds, then form an opi­nion, and make it known that the opi­nion is a scien­ti­fic fact.

        I need to refine my sar­casm. Some­ti­mes it’s a little too vague, and wrap­ped in sym­bo­lic metaphor.