Where to buy pasteurized egg whites?

[Nvr2Thick]

Or is it King of the Horny Queens? Here I am with Dora the Explorer, now back from my voyage in Peru...

http://www.stepintoreading.com/uploads/assets/book_covers/9780449814376.png

I hope you gave Dora a ride she'll never forget.

[AdamSmith]

That's true - the truth is an absolute defense to an allegation of defamation/libel.

That rubric was pierced by this very troubling ruling in 2009 in which a federal appeals court held that reporting truth with "malice" could be held libelous.

 

http://www.niemanlab.org/2009/02/the-most-dangerous-libel-decision-in-decades/

[Rudynate]

That rubric was pierced by this very troubling ruling in 2009 in which a federal appeals court held that reporting truth with "malice" could be held libelous.

 

http://www.niemanlab.org/2009/02/the-most-dangerous-libel-decision-in-decades/

 

 

I'm glad to know that, for the rare occasion on which I have to think about this type of matter.

[Guest]

That rubric was pierced by this very troubling ruling in 2009 in which a federal appeals court held that reporting truth with "malice" could be held libelous.

 

http://www.niemanlab.org/2009/02/the-most-dangerous-libel-decision-in-decades/

 

An interesting decision, although it's just by one appellate court interpreting Massachusetts law. It's about an employee who was fired after he padded his travel expense account. His name was plastered to 1500 employees, most of whom didn't even have travel expense accounts, therefore didn't need to know. While I agree that it's possible there may have been a tort such as intentional infliction of emotional distress or violation of privacy (??), I would have to say that this was certainly not libel by any definition I've understood. Every once in a while my employer likes to catch and fire employees it catches looking into the records of patients whose records the employee doesn't have any business looking into. They don't need to shame the employee by plastering the employee's name in a general e-mail. They may send a general reminder that looking into the records of a patient whose care you're not involved in can get your fired. Believe me, word gets around.

[Rudynate]

They don't need to shame the employee by plastering the employee's name in a general e-mail.

 

That was the point. By unnecessarily publicizing his firing and the offense therefor, they were found to have acted with "actual malice."

[Guest]

That was the point. By unnecessarily publicizing his firing and the offense therefor, they were found to have acted with "actual malice."

 

I didn't say it wasn't malicious. The publicizing of the travel cheat's misdeeds may have indeed been quite malicious. It may even be illegal, for all I know, perhaps violating some workplace privacy laws. It's just not slander. According to Wikipedia, Defamation—also calumny, vilification, and traducement—is the communication of a false statement that harms the reputation of an individual person, business, product, group, government, religion, or nation.

Under common law, to constitute defamation, a claim must generally be false and must have been made to someone other than the person defamed. Some common law jurisdictions also distinguish between spoken defamation, called slander, and defamation in other media such as printed words or images, called libel.

Central to those definitions is that a false statement has been made. If I run past a stop sign doing 10 mph and the officer cites me for speeding, he's cited me for the wrong crime. What I did may be totally illegal. It's simply not speeding.

[Rudynate]

I didn't say it wasn't malicious. The publicizing of the travel cheat's misdeeds may have indeed been quite malicious. It may even be illegal, for all I know, perhaps violating some workplace privacy laws. It's just not slander. According to Wikipedia, Defamation—also calumny, vilification, and traducement—is the communication of a false statement that harms the reputation of an individual person, business, product, group, government, religion, or nation.

Under common law, to constitute defamation, a claim must generally be false and must have been made to someone other than the person defamed. Some common law jurisdictions also distinguish between spoken defamation, called slander, and defamation in other media such as printed words or images, called libel.

Central to those definitions is that a false statement has been made. If I run past a stop sign doing 10 mph and the officer cites me for speeding, he's cited me for the wrong crime. What I did may be totally illegal. It's simply not speeding.

 

 

And that's the problem with this decision. It ignores centuries of precedent.