The key thing that does in Christopher Harborne’s defamation claim against the WSJ is that the allegedly defamatory statement appears to be, er, provably true
The key thing that does in Christopher Harborne’s defamation claim against the WSJ is that the allegedly defamatory statement appears to be, er, provably true
davidgerard.co.uk
Christopher Harborne defamation suit: WSJ motion to dismiss, Bitfinex/Tether, Bank of America, Sackville Bank
Friendly reminder for anyone who cries “free speech” whenever someone talks about libel laws or extending them to the internet. It’s true, or even just convincing a jury of your peers that you honestly believed it was true, is and always has been a perfect protection against libel and defamation. If you are complaining about it, it’s either because you’re area doesn’t have anti SLAPP laws or you don’t think what you said can meet even that bar.