Comments on: defamation self-help (for myself, too) http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/10/26/defamation-self-help-for-myself-too/ news, views and info on self-help law and pro se litigation Wed, 30 Sep 2009 23:11:37 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: david giacalone http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/10/26/defamation-self-help-for-myself-too/comment-page-1/#comment-286 david giacalone Mon, 27 Nov 2006 16:41:14 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/10/26/defamation-self-help-for-myself-too/#comment-286 See Denise Howell's Nov. 20, 2006, <i>Lawgarithms</i> column, <a href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/Howell/?p=64" rel="nofollow">California Supreme Court says individuals not liable for defamatory online third party acts</a>, about the decision in <i>Barrett v. Rosenthal</i>. Denise collects addidional internet links on the case, as does Peter Black, in <a href="http://freedomtodiffer.typepad.com/freedom_to_differ/2006/11/blawg_review_85.html" rel="nofollow"><i>Blawg Review</i> #85</a>. See Denise Howell’s Nov. 20, 2006, Lawgarithms column, California Supreme Court says individuals not liable for defamatory online third party acts, about the decision in Barrett v. Rosenthal. Denise collects addidional internet links on the case, as does Peter Black, in Blawg Review #85.

]]> By: david giacalone http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/10/26/defamation-self-help-for-myself-too/comment-page-1/#comment-154 david giacalone Mon, 30 Oct 2006 17:04:30 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/10/26/defamation-self-help-for-myself-too/#comment-154 After reading our Oct. 28th <a href="http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/10/28/copy-permission-and-copyfraud/" rel="nofollow">Copyfraud posting</a>, a non-expert wonders if claiming a copyright on a document from a government agency would be considered copyfraud, and whether or when doing so might violate the criminal section of the Copyright Law mentioned in that posting [<a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html#506">Sec. 506(c)</a>]. Do any copyright experts have an answer or opinion? After reading our Oct. 28th Copyfraud posting, a non-expert wonders if claiming a copyright on a document from a government agency would be considered copyfraud, and whether or when doing so might violate the criminal section of the Copyright Law mentioned in that posting [Sec. 506(c)]. Do any copyright experts have an answer or opinion?

]]> By: A.R.Yngve http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/10/26/defamation-self-help-for-myself-too/comment-page-1/#comment-135 A.R.Yngve Fri, 27 Oct 2006 11:14:54 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/shlep/2006/10/26/defamation-self-help-for-myself-too/#comment-135 I have no legal schooling, but this I know: A) It matters how "big" the publication was in which the alleged defamation occurred(or not). A line in NEWSWEEK or on CNN carries greater weight than a blog. B) Public figures are expected to take some badmouthing without resorting to lawsuits. Simply put: The more "in-your-face" a public figure is, the more people are allowed to say they've had enough of him/her getting in their faces. Question: how many read Ms. Maxam? How well-known is she? C) The Americans are a very litigious people. (Go ahead, sue me. You know it's true.) I have no legal schooling, but this I know:

A) It matters how “big” the publication was in which the alleged defamation occurred(or not). A line in NEWSWEEK or on CNN carries greater weight than a blog.

B) Public figures are expected to take some badmouthing without resorting to lawsuits. Simply put: The more “in-your-face” a public figure is, the more people are allowed to say they’ve had enough of him/her getting in their faces.
Question: how many read Ms. Maxam? How well-known is she?

C) The Americans are a very litigious people. (Go ahead, sue me. You know it’s true.)

]]>