11–20 of 256 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ireland like the UK has strong defamation laws. I suspect it plays a part in concealing political corruption rather protecting an individuals right to a reputation as pointed out by EU officials a couple of times.
I don't have a horse in this race, but playing devil's advocate: USA doesn't have strong defamation laws, and yet we still have well-concealed corruption.
Are you sure about that? It seems pretty out in the open.
I'm a fan of free speech, but defamation is one of the limits I agree with. The UK has a stricter framework than the US, but I think these cases should happen in the US too. It's good to see precedent being established for prosecuting those that abuse social media for evil. I'm interested in who the guilty party is in this case. They can afford a six figure penalty and want to remain anonymous.
Just kidding, but here in the US you have harassment which is usually a criminal matter and then libel/slander. You can pretty much say whatever you want about a public figure like a politician ad long as it isn't threats, unless your AOC cause she thinks saying she has bad hair is a threat. One of the things a lot of people think from being naive is that if people are saying it online and not getting sued then it must me true, which is how some conspiracies spread.
> This should be a warning to all trolls
Reading the article is important here. The person that was being sued is settling (paying a 6-figure sum) and staying anonymous. They could have fought they case, but they apparently had enough money and were worried about being outed, that it was worth just paying and hiding.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't have a horse in this race, but playing devil's advocate: USA doesn't have strong defamation laws, and yet we still have well-concealed corruption.
> well-concealed Are you sure about that? It seems pretty out in the open.
I wonder if this might have been someone famous for whom 6 figures is expensive but not worth the PR damage?