Even in a Free Speech Nation, you can sue ... and win ... when someone speaks or publishes false defamatory assertions about you.
The person speaking or publishing the defamatory assertions has the burden of proving them true.
The person supposedly defamed has the burden of proving that he has been damaged by the defamation.
The person speaking or publishing the defamatory assertions has the burden of proving them true.
~~~~~
My understanding is the exact opposite. Not only must the complainant prove that the defendant’s statement was false, he must also prove that the defendant knew that the statement was false, but made the statement anyway in order to damage the complainant.
Proving what’s inside of a person’s head is hard to do.
.....Innocent until proven guilty.
Not in all situations, there are limits to free speech, but the burden to restrict is very high. That is why the judges ruled in favor of Westboro. They didn’t have to prove what they said was true, I fact what they said was false, but they were allowed to say it per the courts. And what they said was very damaging to the soldiers and grieving families.
However, on the flip side, there are the cases like the catholic kid who sued CBS NBC etc and won because they said false things about the kid. But maybe he presented facts that proved unfair malice or whatever.
A lot of folks are going for lawsuits claiming they have been damaged lately. We will see how the courts decide. Musk has one pending I believe, Trump has had some I believe? Some other Congress folks are suing too. Gonna be interesting.