Web site libel?

[Kenzkaya]

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

I am in the process of creating a web site and to be honest it is soley for the purpose of making a couple particular people look awefully bad. I want to post recordings I made during phone conversations I was a part of, criminal records that I obtained and paid for thru ICHATS-MI State Police, possibly medical documentation, copies of emails, my suspicions/opinions of possible crimes committed, and narratives stating personal circumstances and opinions on a whole variety of topics relating to these people. I know the difference between libel and slander. If these particular people wanted to sue me for libel, they would have to prove that I said something that was not true, I don't intend to say anything untrue, however, in a libel suit, the other parties would have to prove that what I said was untrue as I understand it.

Further, in some of the recordings, other peoples names are mentioned. Do these "3rd parties" have any legal ground to pursue me. Example: I (A) record a conversation I have with (B) and (B) mentions that (C) did or said something.

What does MI law say about all this?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

 

[>Charlotte<]

Michigan is a two-party state. Did they know they were being recorded?

 

[Kenzkaya]

1 party?

They were aware that I was recording conversations periodically, but not specifically which ones. I can prove this thru emails where they acknowledged that I occassionally record the conversations.

I differ with you on the 2 party thing though, are you sure. From past history and resent researching of the issue, I still understand it to be that only 1 of the parties to the conversation need to be aware of the recording happening....

 

[quincy]

In Michigan, all parties to a conversation must consent to the recording of the conversation, when it is a private conversation and/or there is an expectation of privacy. No third party may record any conversation to which he is not a party (as to do so is a violation of state and federal wiretapping/eavesdropping laws).

Under Michigan Comp Law 750.539, when taping a phone conversation without the consent of all parties, you face a felony charge and 2 years in jail, $2000 in fines, 750.539 (c). To divulge the contents of a conversation that has been recorded without consent, you face a felony charge and 5 years in jail, $5000 in fines, 750.539 (e), and also civil liability and punitive damages, under Mich Comp Law 750.539 (h).

One court in Michigan, in Sullivan v Gray, 324 NW 2d 58 (Mi Ct App 1982), interpreted Michigan's statute to apply only to situations where a third party has intercepted a conversation, however the Michigan Supreme Court said that, whenever there is an expectation of privacy, the recording of a conversation without consent of all parties to the conversation violates Michigan law. Dickerson v Raphael, 601 NW 2d 108 (Mi 1994).

So, in other words, Clt747 is correct. Your recording of any telephone conversations where you have not obtained the consent of the person you are recording violates Michigan statutes.

As for defamation actions, you are risking one with what you say you wish to publish. Reporting on your suspicions of crimes these people may have committed can lead to a defamation action and stating your opinions, if you imply false facts, can lead to a defamation action. Truth is a defense to defamation, although it is not always successful if your "truth" can be shown to be published with malicious intent.

Truth is also not a defense to an invasion of privacy action, and publishing even information contained in public records can lead to an invasion of privacy suit, depending on what is published and how it is published. Publishing anyone's medical records or private medical information is especially risky.

Publishing emails sent to you by anyone is also illegal (although, admittedly, rarely prosecuted). The writer of an email owns the copyright to what is written, not the recipient of the email (who only owns the one copy sent to him). To publish an email received is an infringement on the email-writer's copyright.

Finally, anyone mentioned in your illegally recorded conversations, in any records or reports published, in any opinions or suspicions aired by you, all have possible legal actions they can take against you.

What you are considering, in other words, is a legal risk probably not worth taking. You should consult with a Michigan attorney prior to publication of any of the information you are proposing to publish.

 

[Kenzkaya]

Thank you for the reply. That helps give me a little direction.

 

[phoenix_talons]

What's the point of it being illegal (publishing e-mails) when it's rarely prosecuted?

 

[quincy]

The point, phoenix, is that "rarely" does not mean "never," and the hopes are always that people will obey the law even when they think they can get away with doing something illegal without getting caught or prosecuted for it.

People run risks if they do anything illegal, in other words, even if most people happen to avoid detection or prosecution most of the time.

It is similar to driving over the speed limit. Many people do. The fact that many people DO speed and do not get stopped for speeding, however, does not help you very much if you are the one that gets pulled over by the police for violating the law.