Posted by Chrism on February 12, 2002 at 15:32:43:
In Reply to: Re: Expert opinion wanted posted by Kendall Raine on February 11, 2002 at 14:09:20:
Put another way, are we to infer that Chris could be held liable for remarks made against PADI or anyone else by a third party (e.g. MHK)participating on his BBS? That sounds grossly unfair but I don't know the law.
Probably not. In most cases the party claiming defamation sues the individual under the name identified (it's happened).
Some additional questions:
Can you be held to have committed libel if what you say is true?
No (well, technically no, but whether you're held liable and whether you are right are two very different things unfortunately)
Who bears the burden of proof as to the truth of the statements?
Depends - between private individuals, the defendant has to prove that the statement is true. If the party claiming defamation is a public figure or entity (PADI?), then the PLAINTIFF has to prove that the statement is false.
Are views articulated as personal opinions actionable?
Well, just because you say it is my opinin that Jon De is a child molestor doesn't mean you wn't be sued.
Who bears the burden on damages?
Plaintiff
If damages can't be proven, can one still establish a case for libel?
Here, PADI has sued in what is called "libel per se," in which damages are assumed since the requirement is that it injure someone in his business or professin (among others).
Is there case law on damages arising out of an unedited BBS/chat room where opinions expressed are those of the writers only. I've heard of actions brought for securities law violations by people trying to manipulate stock prices, but this a seems trickier.
Yes, against the writers