Lots of folks are submitting the USA Today story about a woman who successfully sued an online critic for $11 million for defamation. There seems to be some concern that this is a big statement limiting what people can say online, but that's not clear at all. Defamation is defamation, online or not. And, if you're going to accuse someone of being a "con artist" and a "fraud," you should probably have some evidence to back that up. Now, it's completely possible that the accused can back that up -- but it's worth pointing out that she didn't show up at court to defend herself. She claims she can't afford a lawyer, and didn't even know the court date of the case because the info was sent to her address in New Orleans -- which she had abandoned for a few months following Hurricane Katrina. So, the case really doesn't say much about online speech or defamation, since there really was no defense at all.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Ex-FBI Agent, Trauma Surgeon Testify That Kelly Thomas' Death Was A Result Of Officers' Excessive Force
- Scumbag Revenge Porn Site Operator Arrested... But Many Of The Charges Are Very Problematic
- Legal Challenges To Spying Mount In UK
- Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood Thinks Google Is To Blame For Infringement On The Web
- Feds To FISC: Of Course We Don't Have To Share Our Full Legal Filings With Companies Suing Us Over NSA Transparency