Term
| The two definitions of Defamation |
|
Definition
Communication that injures a person's reputation.
Communication that exposes a person to hatred, ridicule or contempt, lowers him in the esteem of others, causes the person to be shunned or injures him in his business or profession. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Libel (Written defamation) Slander (spoken defamation) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Any living person, a corporation, an unincorporated association,organization or society (a labor union, charitable foundation and fraternal organization) |
|
|
Term
| What must a libel plaintiff prove to win a libel suit? |
|
Definition
| Publication, Identification, Defamatory content, injury, fault or falsity |
|
|
Term
| Must a libel plaintiff prove every point in order to prove defamation? |
|
Definition
| Yes, they must prove every single one. |
|
|
Term
| When does publication occur? |
|
Definition
| Occurs when at least one person other than the defamed person has received/heard the words. |
|
|
Term
| How many people need to be in a defamation suit? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Can a person be sued for anything that's written? |
|
Definition
| Yes, a person could technically be sued for anything that's written. |
|
|
Term
| What is the Republication Rule? |
|
Definition
| Each person who participates in the repetition or republication of a libelous statement can be held legally liable. "The bearer of tales is as guilty as the teller of tales" |
|
|
Term
| What is the ISP exception? |
|
Definition
| An ISP (internet service provider) cannot be held liable for defamation on its system, just as a library or news vendor is not liable. |
|
|
Term
| What is the Communications Decency Act? |
|
Definition
| In 1996, ISPs were not treated as publishers or republishers of information provided on their systems by others. |
|
|
Term
| What constitutes Identification? |
|
Definition
| The plaintiff can be identified by extrinsic facts not included in published material. Identification can be by name, picture, initials, penname, nickname, sketch, drawing, even a description. |
|
|
Term
| Must the person be recognizable for identification? |
|
Definition
| Yes, they must be recognizable. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When members of a group sue for defamation. |
|
|
Term
| What are the rules of group libel? |
|
Definition
1) The group or class is so small that the matter can be easily understood to refer to the member.
2) Circumstances of publication reasonably give rise to the conclusion that there is a particular reference to the member. |
|
|
Term
| Can a member of a group sue for libel if the entire group is defamed but the member is not mentioned individually? |
|
Definition
| Depends on the size of the group and the nature of the statement. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Intangible, loss of reputation, standing in community, mental harm, emotional distress, etc. (Sometimes monetary) |
|
|
Term
| What must plaintiffs prove for injury? |
|
Definition
| They must prove some injury unless they can prove actual malice. |
|
|
Term
| Is truth a defense in a defamation suit? |
|
Definition
| Yes, truth is an absolute defense in a defamation suit. |
|
|
Term
| What is Defamatory Content? |
|
Definition
| in court, a judge determines whether a message is capable of being defamatory. A jury also decides if the words, in their everyday meaning, actually defamed the plaintiff. |
|
|
Term
| What are examples of Defamatory Content? |
|
Definition
| Accusation of a crime, STD, Adultery, Infidelities, dishonesty etc. |
|
|
Term
| What are the categories of libelous (defamatory) content? |
|
Definition
1) Libel per se
2) Libel per quod |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| "obviously defamatory" words, are defamatory on their face. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Words that are not ordinarily defamatory but become damaging because of the facts or circumstances extrinsic to the story. |
|
|
Term
| What must the plaintiff prove in libel per quod? |
|
Definition
| The plaintiff must prove the special circumstances, that the audience understood the defamatory connotation, and special damages, that is, actual monetary loss. |
|
|
Term
| What are examples of libel per se? |
|
Definition
1) Accusations of criminal conduct or activity
2) Allegations of crimes, unethical practices or incompetence related to one's occupation.
3) Attacks on one's character traits or lifestyle, including claims of sexual promiscuity or marital infidelity.
4) Claims that one has an undesirable or contagious disease. |
|
|
Term
| What can businesses sue for in defamatory content? |
|
Definition
| Communications that damage their corporate reputations (poor service, poor products, allegations of unstable finances, allegations that products could damage the public health and safety) |
|
|
Term
| What is product disparagement or trade libel? |
|
Definition
| Form of defamatory content, a communication that defames a commercial product rather than the company that makes it. |
|
|
Term
| What are "Veggie libel laws" |
|
Definition
| Form of defamatory content, some states hve laws against the communication of false information about food safety. |
|
|
Term
| What are the basic rules of Fault? |
|
Definition
Public officials and public figures must prove actual malice to win their lawsuits and collect any damages.
Private persons must prove at lest negligence to win their lawsuits and collect compensatory damages.
All plaintiffs, public and private, must prove actual malice to collect punitive damages if the subject of the report is a matter of public concern. |
|
|
Term
| What are compensatory damages? |
|
Definition
| Designed to compensate for damages. |
|
|
Term
| What are punitive damages? |
|
Definition
| Compensation and punishment for damages. |
|
|
Term
| What was the significance of New York Times v. Sullivan? |
|
Definition
| The Supreme Court established a fault requirement for public officials. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth. |
|
|
Term
| What did Justice Brennan express in NYT v. Sullivan? |
|
Definition
| In order to protect everything that is true, we are going to have to protect things that are false. (The Chilling Effect) |
|
|
Term
| What is a public official? |
|
Definition
| Those among the hierarchy of government employees who have, or appear to the public to have, substansial responsibility for or control over the conduct of governmental affairs. |
|
|
Term
| What case defined a public official? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| What indicators do the courts look at to define a public official? |
|
Definition
1) Does the individual control expenditure of public money?
2) Does the individual have ability to set govn't policy or make governmental decisions?
3) Does the individual have control over citizens (responsible for health, safety or welfare)?
4) Are they highly publicly visible? |
|
|
Term
| What are some examples of public officials? |
|
Definition
| Social worker, police officers, high school principal. |
|
|
Term
| Do all the indicators need to be met for someone to be considered a public official? |
|
Definition
| No, not all of the indicators need to be met. |
|
|
Term
| What cases extended Actual Malice to public figures? |
|
Definition
| AP v. Walker & Curtis Publishing Co v. Butts, Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. |
|
|
Term
| What was the significance of AP v. Walker & Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts (1967) ? |
|
Definition
| Public figures also have to prove actual malice. However, no definition of public figure was provided. |
|
|
Term
| What was the significance of Gertz v. Robert Welch,Inc (1974)? |
|
Definition
| The court defined the term "public figure" and ruled that private plaintiffs DO NOT have to prove actual malice. |
|
|
Term
| What are the two kinds of public figures? |
|
Definition
1) All-purpose public figure
2) Limited purpose public figure |
|
|
Term
| What are limited-purpose public figures? |
|
Definition
| Individuals who "have thrust themselves to the forefront of particular public controversies in order to influence the resolution of the issues involved" |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A person cannot be made public by the actions of the media. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1) Failure to exercise ordinary care or to act as reasonably prudent person would under similar circumstances.
2) Failure to follow accepted professional standards and practices. |
|
|
Term
| How do the courts determine fault? |
|
Definition
1) Direct, state-of-mind evidence, what the journalist(s) thought, believed, felt or said at the time the story was being produced.
2)Indirect or circumstantial evidence, typically including (but not limited to):
a) The source(s) used or not used
b) The nature of the story, especially whether the story was "hot news"
c) The inherent probability or believability of the alleged defamation |
|
|
Term
| What are the fault levels required in libel actions? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Public figures and public officials are required to prove actual malice, knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth.
Private persons only need to prove NEGLIGENCE in most states in order to win. But must prove actual malice if they want to win punitive damages. |
|
|
Term
| What is the "wire service" defense? |
|
Definition
| Courts hold that it is not negligent to publish a wire service story without checking the facts in the story. (not a separate "defense" but an absence of negligence) |
|
|
Term
| Who must prove falsity in libel cases? |
|
Definition
| Public officials, public figures, and private persons involved in matters of public concern must prove falsity. |
|
|
Term
| What is the fair report or reporters privilege? |
|
Definition
| protects reports of official govnerment proceedings and records if the reports are accurate, fair or balanced, substantially complete or not motivated by malice. (Courts in some states said the report must be attributed to the official record or meeting for privilege to apply) |
|
|
Term
| What is the privilege of communications of mutual interest? |
|
Definition
1) it is about something in which the speaker has an interest or duty.
2) The hearer has corresponding interest or duty
3) the statement is made in protection of that interest or performance of that duty.
4) the speaker honestly believes the statement to be true. |
|
|
Term
| What is the natural reportage defense? |
|
Definition
1st amendment protects and says that the charges must be:
1) newsworthy and related to a public controversy.
2) Made by a responsible person or organization.
3) Made against a public official or public figure.
4) Accurately reported with opposing views and reported impartially. |
|
|
