by Mike Masnick
Fri, Sep 10th 2010 3:36pm
You don't see this one every day. A lawyer is suing the opposing lawyer in a high profile controversial case about a teenaged runaway, claiming that the opposing lawyer defamed him, by saying in a TV interview that he was "unqualified" and "that he has terrorist ties." While the latter clearly could be defamatory (the former might be... but seems more like a statement of opinion, not fact), it does make you wonder if such a lawsuit really is effective in preventing "damage to his reputation." I would think that most people would recognize the statements in context, rather than automatically assuming they were true.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Techdirt's First Amendment Fight For Its Life
- Donald Trump Learns Why It's Important Not To 'Open Up' Libel Laws, As Suit Against Him Is Tossed
- Google Apparently No Longer Humoring Court Orders To Delist Defamatory Content
- Confirmed Horrible Person James Woods Continues Being Horrible In 'Winning' Awful Lawsuit To Unmask Deceased Online Critic
- City Passes Ordinance Mandating CCTV Surveillance By Businesses, Including Doctors And Lawyers Offices