hippy:
> "Jose Rizal" <_@_._> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "Seem" is the operative word. There's also a difference between
> someone
> > expressing an opinion, and someone maliciously slandering a company or
> > individual.
>
> What if my opinion is that person X just tried to run me over?
I think it might be prudent to put yourself in the other person's shoes
to get a feel for what it would be like. If a motorist puts up a
website, and published details of your bike, equipment, and times you
ride through a commuting route, along with all sorts of accusations eg
"be aware of cyclist on blue Giant NRS, red helmet, green messenger bag,
rides along Smith St heading south between 5-5:30pm weekdays, runs
through red lights, scares little children, abuses the elderly, flashes
shoppers, abducts pets, and oppresses several African countries...". If
your friends recognise you from this description and you feel you're
being harshly judged by this someone whom you don't even know, how would
you like to be able to resolve the situation?
> > Never legally. You have a right to accuse someone of evildoing, and
> > hopefully you'll have evidence for this, but defamation is something
> > different. Defamation is "the wrong of maliciously injuring the good
> > name of another" (dictionary term). I don't think this latter is a
> > right of anyone, and it doesn't impinge on the defamed's right to sue
> > you.
>
> Well if I've got the right to accuse someone of evildoing - why
> can't this be in the form of a paragraph or two on a website?
I think you'll run into trouble once you start to specifically identify
people.
> If the information on this website just listed the events that took
> place rather than "some f&% in car ***-123 can't drive for
> s&%# and nearly killed me!" that's not maliciously injuring the
> good name of someone.
A car license plate is enough information to identify someone.
Neighbours, friends, and relatives may readily recognise the plate
number. That's when people will start to take issue with you, I'm sure.
> It is just explaining an event that occured in my life and what
> I saw - surely there is nothing wrong with that?
That's different to what you were suggesting though, of a database of
car plates of people who have done you wrong.
> Lots of people have blogs online that would mention "some
> pri^& in a blue toyota camry backed over my gnome this
> morning!!" and I've not heard of action taken against blog
> writers. Of course that doesn't mean it's never happened
> but I still don't see how it could be illegal to write about
> something that I experienced.
That's because each driver of blue Toyota Camrys don't know if it's them
who's being maligned. A "blue Toyota Camry" is general enough of a
description of a car as to be almost anonymous. Car license plates are
much more specific.
> > By using the term defamation up front, you're admitting that you're
> > engaging in slander, or wrongly attacking the reputation of another.
> An
> > accusation backed up by evidence, however, can be proven to not be
> > defamation.
>
> Okay I'm not up to scratch on the legal terms but why couldn't I
> say "car ABC-123 cut me off after performing an illegal u-turn on
> suchandsuch rd."? The evidence would be my vision. Isn't that why they get "witnesses"
> into court rooms?
That's still just your word against the other person's, and who will be
the mediator who will determine whether you are telling the truth or
not? Therefore, who is to prove you're not just slandering someone
baselessly? Following this, you're then open to a defamation suit.
> > > There has to be massive amounts of defamation happening on
> > > the 'net ALL the time.. why would this be any different?
> > > People bag this bike company and that bike company...
> > > People insult each other... etc.
> >
> > Just because some of people run red lights, doesn't mean you're right
> in
> > doing so yourself. This kind of argument won't wash well in court.
>
> That's fine, I'm still not convinced though that I'd be legally " in the
> wrong" if I typed a story of my biking life, including details of cars
> that broke the law. It's not attacking someone. It's not without
> evidence. The drivers could retort. Where is the illegality?
Your contention that they broke the law, and the implication that these
people are wrongdoers, all backed up only by your word can constitute a
basis for a defamation claim against you.