Any pictures of the ska-, er, model?
This may have a chilling effect on Digg types and the morons infesting USA Today’s site.
Different standards for liable and defamation in Europe.
In the US, truth is a defense against such charges, and opinion is not actionable.
Not so in Europe.
SKANK
The funny thing is, truth is an absolute defense to defamation. I would think, once the blogger is unmasked, that he or she will win her case because IN MY HUMBLE OPINION (I guess we have to make that clear now) most models — and many women in NYC, where I live — ARE skanks.
What next? Must we sign all "Letters to the Editor" and can we be sued for our opinions in those letters?
Are bloggers now subject to lawsuits because they "defame" the good standing of homosexuals or abortion physicians or democrats?
Dude, that’s a CGI chick from one of those Grand Theft Auto games!! LMAO!
there is an article in today’s NY Post about Cohen. turns out she’s a total b-tch. she flipped out on the reporter who was just doing a nice little puff piece on her.
Not guilty, pending further evidence.
We’d better inform the Whitehouse, this smells fishy
What a skank.
So all the people who post negative on-line reviews of products can now be sued by the manufacturers?
This judge is out of her mind.
http://internetdefamationblog.com/?p=96
Fourth paragraph:
Look carefully at the comments. Defamation arises when someone falsely accuses someone else of, basically, illegal, immoral or unethical conduct. The comments don’t charge her merely with being a skank, but claim she is psychotic, a liar and a whore. The action would never have survived review if all that had been said is that she is a skank. That term is ill-defined and nebulous enough that arguably one could from the pictures form the opinion that word is an appropriate description. But what is the justification for the remainder of the remarks? What is the factual basis for calling her psychotic, or saying she is a lying whore? The comments go far beyond calling her a skank.
Gosh - if you can be sued for calling this woman a skank,
think of what could happen if you were truthful about
Michelle’s looks.
No wonder the media lies about her.
Kinda scary.
In court they’ll have to define “skank” and whether or not she qualifies as one.
Here’s what a skank(she) looks like.
http://internetdefamationblog.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/liskulacohen.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_WBjGtFQOJDw/SWSqh-3iZOI/AAAAAAAAJb8/qq_G9mZVJEk/s320/skank2.jpg
http://www.inquisitr.com/wp-content/liskula-cohen.jpg
I guess that means now if you want to blog about some model having a plastic nose and chunky thighs you’ll have to register under a fake name thru a proxy server with the site hosted in the Principality of Sealand...
