And this is a forum for anonymous user posts. The HP pretends to be a newspaper with approved editors. The less control Jim exerts, the less liability he has. The most that happens at FR is deletion upon complaint.
For the sake of Liberty and the Constitution, let us pray there will never be a trial.
I don't believe the 1st Amendment intended slander to be protected. They were kind of serious about slights to one's honor back then (just ask Alexander Hamilton). Besides, this would be a civil issue, not a government prosecution.
So anonymous web forums are entitled to free speech, but news sites are not?
The less control Jim exerts, the less liability he has.
I wonder if Jim Robinson thinks that it is a victory for free speech that John Gibson is suing the Huffington post for a doctored video posted on their site?
Jim, you care to chime in on this? It seems I am the only one on this thread that sees John Gibson's proposed lawsuit as a threat to Internet free speech.
I don't believe the 1st Amendment intended slander to be protected.
If I called you an idiot, would that be slander?
If Gibson wins this lawsuit, then every time we say anything that is disputable about a public figure, they could sue us into bankruptcy.
They were kind of serious about slights to one's honor back then (just ask Alexander Hamilton).
Those kinds of insults were not dealt with in court. They were dealt with in an open field.
Besides, this would be a civil issue, not a government prosecution.
The right to sue for slander is a statutory right. The courts act as agents of the Government in resolving Civil Disputes. If the courts allow these kind of lawsuits to be prosecuted, then the courts become the agents of the government in suppressing free speech.
I have pinged Jim Robinson. I'd really appreciate his take on this threatened lawsuit against the Huffington Post.