15 posts in this topic

For the first time, a case of alleged libel on Twitter is going to trial and the accused is singer-actress Courtney Love.

In a 2010 tweet, Love suggested her lawyer at the time, Rhonda Holmes, had been "bought off" when she wouldn't help Love in a legal battle with the managers of her late husband's estate. Love was married to Nirvana front man Kurt Cobain.

A handful of Twitter libel, or Twibel, cases have been filed in the past, but Love's case is the only one that has made it to trial in the U.S.

"The Courtney Love Twitter lawsuit is monumental because the judge has now determined that tweeting in California can potentially give rise to liability under the theory of defamation," attorney Brian Claypool said, who is not affiliated with this case.

"The Courtney Love case will set a precedent that will result in, potentially, the average person being liable as well," Claypool added.

Love, 49, took the witness stand Wednesday and said the tweet was merely an opinion, that the Internet is full of hyperbole and exaggeration. Love said she thought she was only tweeting it to two people. Love's testimony is expected to continue later today.

But Holmes' attorney told ABC News station KABC-TV that the tweet was a damaging statement.

"'Bought off' means somebody got to [Holmes], somebody paid her a bribe," attorney Mitchell Langberg said.

This case could also re-write the rules for the much-loved celebrity Twitter wars that have made headlines over the years: Miley Cyrus vs. Sinead O'Connor and Demi Lovato vs. Perez Hilton just to name two.

source

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

post-2-0-26839300-1389956978.jpg

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

Ironically, you did post in this thread :p

Anyways, this is stupid and goes nowhere. Anyone can say anything on the internet. You cant even proof (easyly) that a person named Bob really is named Bob....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, so to sum it up...

 

If you say something libelous or slanderous, the law still applies if you do it online?

 

Gosh! ;)

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hardly new, not to the UK at least. People have already gotten into deep kaka with stuff they've posted on Twitter and other social media sites.  Some are even in prison for it, others have been sued.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here's an idea. dont use Twitter. it's useless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hardly new, not to the UK at least. People have already gotten into deep kaka with stuff they've posted on Twitter and other social media sites.  Some are even in prison for it, others have been sued.

Indeed. Seems you can even get sued just for retweeting someone else's tweet, like what happened with Alan Davies: http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/oct/24/lord-mcalpine-libel-alan-davies I've even been accused of libel once on Twitter by someone from Clearcast.

 

FYR25.jpg

 

The remark I made was in response to this article. He deleted the tweet soon after, so good thing I took a screenshot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Intelligent people don't use Twitter :shifty:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here's an idea. dont use Twitter. it's useless.

Maybe you should Tweet that and see if any one sues :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So wait, if I said that apple products and gold plated toilet seats have a lot in common I can be sued?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So wait, if I said that apple products and gold plated toilet seats have a lot in common I can be sued?

 

_Alexander can no longer reply due to gag orders from both Apple and the PMTSAA (Precious Metal Toilet Seat Association of America).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a formal of libel defamation the same as any other printed media

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like all I use Twitter for is yelling at my local news paper for how incompetent it is (I don't have many followers...).  I didn't think about being sued, but really...why can't I be critical of the fact that all they do is re-post Associated Press articles and write pro-police, pro-city council pieces?  Meanwhile they exported a bunch of local web design and IT jobs to India.

 

What is a good guide for acceptable and crossing the line?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being critical of something is not the issue we are all allowed to voice our opinion but in moderation which is why many papers quote another source and use the word allegedly quite a lot.The problem is people are being labelled i.e. pedophiles as happened in the UK with no evidence either concrete or circumstantial but just by Chinese whispers.

 

All papers and news sites are usually Pro some side or other depending on the politics of the owner and the editorial staff, take Fox news for example they allegedly have a political bias so Ive read in other posts.If you base you opinion on proven facts and known sources then you have a rightfully valid comment, there will always be detractors on both sides of the political spectrum so writers can never please everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.