TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
I think Rich has pretty much got it. I forgot who else on this list
started out as I did in newspaper work and might back me up on this, but
I specifically recall that in my "Law of the Press" class (Kent State
University, about 1972 or '73), the U.S. Supreme Court decisions on
libel ("Time Magazine vs Hill", for instance) were about 10 years old or
so.
"Libel" is written defamation, "Slander" is spoken defamation.
Here are some examples:
* John falsely telling Bob with no one else around that Joe "stole my
wallet" is NOT slander. Even if Bob tells Joe or someone else what John
had said ("hearsay"). The statement was not "published", i.e., uttered
in front of at least one third party.
* John falsely telling Bob that Joe "stole my wallet" with at least one
person within hearing distance, IS slander.
* John falsely writing down notes that Joe "stole my wallet" and then
distributing ("publishes") the notes IS libel.
* John falsely writing down private notes for no one else to ever see
that Joe "stole my wallet" is NOT libel. (This purely rhetorical, since
if no one ever sees it, who is to know what was written down? Anybody
here up for some Plato?)
And remember, truth (Joe did steal John's wallet) is an absolute
defense.
Also, the victim of the alleged defamation must prove either that the
"slanderer" knew the statement was not true or had reckless disregard
for the truth in the matter.
So in the above statements, if John really and honestly believes that
Joe ""stole my wallet" because of a circumstance that later turned out
to be different from what John thought, it would be hard to prove that
John was reckless in his accusation.
But if it is proven that John was simply pee-oh'd at Joe and fabricated
the accusation to cause trouble, John IS guilty of libel / slander.
Then begins the issue of was the victim damaged and by how much, etc.
This is where public officials and "public persons" find it very hard to
collect sizeable damages.
-- Ken in Atlanta
-----Original Message-----
From: techwr-l-bounces+poshedlyk=polysius -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
[mailto:techwr-l-bounces+poshedlyk=polysius -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com] On
Behalf Of Combs, Richard
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 3:29 PM
To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Subject: RE: Techie's List
Tariel, Lauren R wrote:
> It isn't libel if it is true, also the list owner can disclaim any
> responsibility for the opinion of others, unless the opinion seems
> false and outrageous. Or something like that.
We're all entitled to our opinions and feelings. If I say, "I don't
trust Acme -- I felt like they were trying to take advantage of me,"
that's not slanderous -- unless I'm maliciously lying about my opinions
and feelings. But if I said, "They cheated me," and I can't prove it, I
may have a legal problem.
That said, Kevin Amery made an important point about the
other-than-legal ramifications of posting negative comments about
employers/clients.
I certainly would never hire someone who publicly declared, "I've never
met a company that I would trust," and repeatedly bragged about how many
companies she'd dragged before regulatory agencies or into court.
But maybe that's just me.
Richard
------
Richard G. Combs
Senior Technical Writer
Polycom, Inc.
richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom
303-223-5111
------
rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom
303-777-0436
------
Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats
or printed documentation. Features include single source authoring, team
authoring, Web-based technology, and PDF output. http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
Now shipping: Help & Manual 4 with RoboHelp(r) import! New editor,
full Unicode support. Create help files, web-based help and PDF in up to
106 languages with Help & Manual: http://www.helpandmanual.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as poshedlyK -at- polysius -dot- com -dot-
To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
__________________________
This e-mail message and any attachment contains private
and confidential information and is intended for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient (or responsible
for delivery of the message to such person), please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication to others.
If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message, and then delete it from your system.
Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
printed documentation. Features include single source authoring, team authoring,
Web-based technology, and PDF output. http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
Now shipping: Help & Manual 4 with RoboHelp(r) import! New editor,
full Unicode support. Create help files, web-based help and PDF in up
to 106 languages with Help & Manual: http://www.helpandmanual.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- infoinfocus -dot- com -dot-
