Libel on message board

[jimnyc]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? New York

I own a message board with similar formatting to this one, and it's politically based. Obviously, it ends up being conservative beliefs versus liberal beliefs.

One of our moderators called one of the members a "liberal". This member is in fact clearly a conservative, and the moderator likely did write it to piss this guy off. Now he is claiming over and over that he has been libeled.

The members of this board, similar to this one, use "usernames" and no one is identifiable. The member claims his reputation has been harmed, even though his reputation is based off of a username he uses on a couple of political based forums.

Can calling someone a liberal, when they are clearly a conservative, rise to the level of "libel"?

(before you ask, yes this is serious. As owner, I'm only asking to put an argument to bed, and of course to protect myself).

Thanks much in advance!!!

 

[single317dad]

Here is a link to the Digital Media Law Project's page on defamation laws in New York:

http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/new-york-defamation-law

http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/new-york-defamation-law

There you can find a wealth of information on the law and related case law regarding both your and your members' liability for defamation.

Personally, I'd tell the guy that by threatening to sue over that statement he was acting like a sniveling liberal, but that's poor legal advice and I'm a bit of a loose canon when it comes to politics.

 

[LeeHarveyBlotto]

Not remotely. Break out the banhammer.

 

[quincy]

Not remotely ...

Well, maybe remotely.

I seem to remember an odd old case over liberal/conservative labels that led to a defamation suit, although the facts of the case differed in essential ways. I will try to locate it.

But I tend to agree with the others that, although nothing can prevent the forum member from suing (other than sanity), under the circumstances you describe it would be difficult if not impossible for the conservative anonymous poster on your message board to base a successful lawsuit on claims he was defamed by being called a liberal.

The link to the Digital Media Law Project site provided by single317dad is a good one.

Thanks for the private message, jimnyc.

 

[jimnyc]

Thanks guys, and thanks Quincy. This is just a never ending argument on my board. And before I 'fully' dismiss a member for claiming libel, I wanted to ensure that he didn't have anything. I figured being anonymous, and having no damages... but I'm not an attorney. Thanks for any and all feedback!!

 

[Zigner]

Thanks guys, and thanks Quincy. This is just a never ending argument on my board. And before I 'fully' dismiss a member for claiming libel, I wanted to ensure that he didn't have anything. I figured being anonymous, and having no damages... but I'm not an attorney. Thanks for any and all feedback!!

When you boot him you can expect him to say he's going to sue you too.

 

[jimnyc]

When you boot him you can expect him to say he's going to sue you too.

He wouldn't be the first!

But I don't plan on booting him. I just want the argument to end. I'm hoping that if he sees that he has no case for libel, that he'll finally drop his complaining. He's been complaining about being libeled for a few months, and doesn't seem to want to drop it and stop complaining. I know it's stupid, but as owner you get stuck in between almost every argument that happens on such boards. I'm guilty simply for telling him he has no case. I am looking for backup on this, but will admit I'm wrong if he does in fact have a case.

Again, I know this is all quite stupid, IMO. I don't want to take up too much of folks time over what I see as a petty issue. But I figured I would take his complaint seriously and at least get feedback.

Thanks, Zigner!

 

[quincy]

There is the Communications Decency Act, Section 230, to protect you (the forum owner) from a civil action over defamatory statements made by others on your site, if you do not contribute to or encourage the publication of the content.

As to the anonymity provided by user names: If an unnamed individual can be identified by others through description or circumstance, this can be enough of an identification to meet that element of defamation.

 

[jimnyc]

There is the Communications Decency Act, Section 230, to protect you (the forum owner) from a civil action over defamatory statements made by others on your site, if you do not contribute to or encourage the publication of the content.

As to the anonymity provided by user names: If an unnamed individual can be identified by others through description or circumstance, this can be enough of an identification to meet that element of defamation.

Ok, I will look into that, thanks, Quincy. And what about damages? Do there need to be some sort of damages to have a successful libel case?

 

[jimnyc]

I'm more interested in putting this lame argument to bed on my site. This member is from the UK. Something tells me that he isn't coming to NY to sue me over being called a liberal. Nonetheless, he won't drop the issue. He swears he has a case for libel, even though as far as I know, no one can identify him outside of his username, and he has no damages.

 

[Zigner]

I'm more interested in putting this lame argument to bed on my site. This member is from the UK. Something tells me that he isn't coming to NY to sue me over being called a liberal. Nonetheless, he won't drop the issue. He swears he has a case for libel, even though as far as I know, no one can identify him outside of his username, and he has no damages.

Put him on time out and then boot him if he won't shut up about it.

 

[jimnyc]

Put him on time out and then boot him if he won't shut up about it.

I agree that this would temporarily shut folks up about the issue. I was hoping that showing that there was really no case would shut EVERYONE up about the issue. I mean, I know he can still sue, but if it were SO far out there that he has no likelihood of remotely having a case, then I post that and lock the thread and it's over and done. I'm trying to be as fair about this as possible, without being accused of censorship. But I'll be closing down the theatrics today anyway, was just hoping to have some closure too.

 

[Just Blue]

Here is a link to the Digital Media Law Project's page on defamation laws in New York:

http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/new-york-defamation-law

http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/new-york-defamation-law

There you can find a wealth of information on the law and related case law regarding both your and your members' liability for defamation.

Personally, I'd tell the guy that by threatening to sue over that statement he was acting like a sniveling liberal, but that's poor legal advice and I'm a bit of a loose canon when it comes to politics.

This will SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO surprise you...But I find being called a liberal...jus' fine.

 

[single317dad]

This member is from the UK. Something tells me that he isn't coming to NY to sue me over being called a liberal.

In the UK, the label "Liberal" (defunct party) or "Liberal Democrat" (current party) actually have a more specific meaning than the broader way the term is used in the US. If anything, the facts as a whole in this thread now point to even less of a chance of a successful lawsuit.

 

[quincy]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? New York

... Can calling someone a liberal, when they are clearly a conservative, rise to the level of "libel"? ...

I apologize for getting back to this thread so late, jimnyc. I imagine you have already handled your conservative member from the UK in the way he needed to be handled. But, since I am fully-caffeinated right now and have some time to kill ...

I found the case I was thinking of but, as I said earlier, the essential facts of the case are different than what you have presented here - and far different than I remembered. The case, from 2009, involved a Muslim leader (Taj Hargey) who filed a defamation suit against a Muslim newspaper (Muslim Weekly) for stating that Hargey's liberal views were not conservative enough for him to be a proper Muslim. And Hargey won the suit.

I also didn't remember that the suit was filed in the UK, where defamation laws are far different and more plaintiff-friendly than they are in the US, but it seems to apply more now that I know your forum member is a UK resident.

Perhaps had your conservative friend filed suit against you in the UK five years ago (and assuming he could meet ALL of the elements required for a defamation claim there, which seems unlikely), then he might have had a shot at winning. He would not have anti-SLAPP suits and the First Amendment to contend with, which commonly get similar cases dismissed or defeated in the US. Had he won in the UK, he could then have had the judgment enforced in the US.

Today, however, not only would it be highly unlikely in the US for a conservative to be able to show that being a labeled a liberal was defamatory (although I believe Donald Trump recently claimed just that ), in the UK any suit that he might file and be successful with (also unlikely) would be hard to enforce in the US.

Since 2010, not only has the US passed the SPEECH Act (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-111publ223.htm) which makes foreign libel judgments unenforceable if they violate First Amendment and anti-SLAPP laws, many states (including New York) have also passed their own laws that address foreign libel suits, and these laws tend to meet or exceed the conditions of the SPEECH Act (https://www.rcfp.org/browse-media-law-resources/news/new-york-enacts-libel-terrorism-protection-act).

Good luck with your message board.