Defamation or Libel

godtabh

What’s the difference between the both?

Some one I work with called me a racist (via email to myself and in public to other co workers).

She has done it several times.

Which would this fall under?

PS I'm not a racist

Hobart

As far as I know, and without commenting on the specifis on which you alleged happened, defamation occurs where a false statement is published about a person and said person believes that what was published tends to lower them in the eyes of right thinking members of society. The key word being published.

Again, as far as I know, defamation is a form of libel. The only other form I know of, is slander.

aidjtk

defamation is the area of law. libel is when it involves print ( including radio and possibly e mail) slander is the other area and involves spoken word.
in your case if the email is sent just to you there is no defamation. it must be published to a third party. if it is sent to everyone including you then there is publication. Name calling is unlikely to be allowed so being called a racist is unlikely defamatory( unless your job involves working with people of a different race) if you need more info PM me. the best idea would be to tell him is annoying and stop( i know its childish but so is he).It could also be work place harrassment but I don't know the area of law well

just read your post again ( bad lawyer i know should have got it all on the first go). it seems to be defamation but I'm only a student the correct definition ( thanks for this lads i have a test on friday and it may come up)
defamation is a statement by a person about the plaintif that tends to lower the plaintiff in the eyes of right minded members of society, or holds that person up to ridicule or contempt by right minded members of society; Berry v Irish times

tell the person it is hurtfull and it needs to stop BEFORE TAKING ANY OTHER OPTIONS
tell your senior manager or his senior manager ( if he is above You ) that someone is sending hurtfull emails( don't give names or you may defame the person your self)
taking it to court is the last resort and at the cost of a solicitor and the relative low payment you might receive.
deal with it with the person before any other action
do not resort to fighting that person or trying to get that person fired
try and deal with it with mediation.
I am only a student and not in any sence a legal expert.This is advice only and consequence is not my fault.

godtabh

Thanks for all the replies.

This is an on going thing and all I really want is a defenition and then try and figure out what the defenition applies to.

I will talk to my employer as I fell that alegations like this can easily stick and I want to nip it in the bud asap.

Thirdfox

Defamation:
The publication of false and defamatory material to a third party without lawful justification.

Bold parts are the key parts of defamation, you need them all to succeed in an action.

e.g. if person said "you are a paedophile" to you (and only you) then there is no third party involved and defamation has not taken place.

Libel is defamation in permanent form e.g. e-mail, letter, articles, posts on boards.ie(!)
Slander is defamation of a transient form e.g. speech, broadcast.

godtabh

Thirdfox wrote:

Defamation:
The publication of false and defamatory material to a third party without lawful justification.

Bold parts are the key parts of defamation, you need them all to succeed in an action.

e.g. if person said "you are a paedophile" to you (and only you) then there is no third party involved and defamation has not taken place.

Libel is defamation in permanent form e.g. e-mail, letter, articles, posts on boards.ie(!)
Slander is defamation of a transient form e.g. speech, broadcast.

This is what I was looking for. Thanks for that

Thirdfox

You're welcome. I do have an exam in this in 2 weeks time! But remember my disclaimer, I could well be totally wrong - if in doubt legally, seek a solicitor.

Always try to resolve things without resorting to court action though. Hope everything works out in the end.

*edit: forgot an all important comma (try to spot where I put it!)

godtabh

Thirdfox wrote:

You're welcome. I do have an exam in this in 2 weeks time! But remember my disclaimer I could well be totally wrong - if in doubt legally, seek a solicitor.

Always try to resolve things without resorting to court action though. Hope everything works out in the end.

If no intention of brining it to court but I'm hoping the fact that I sound like I know what I'm talking about will mean my employer takes it serious

dermot_sheehan

kearnsr wrote:

What’s the difference between the both?

Some one I work with called me a racist (via email to myself and in public to other co workers).

She has done it several times.

Which would this fall under?

PS I'm not a racist

Defamation is the tort dealing with reputation, it is divided into Libel and Slander. The essential elements are the same, something that lowers you in the eyes of a right thinking member of society or holding you to ridicule or contempt that is "published" (received by third parties). So someone calling you something when there's no one else around is not defamatory as there's no publication.

Defamation is divided into libel and slander, libel is published (written down), broadcasts, etc, things in a permanent form, while slander is spoken.

The differances between the two are that for libel you are entitled to damages without showing specific damage (i.e. that you suffered economic harm). For slander you have to show you suffered specific damage to claim. There are a couple of exceptions to this rule however, if someone slanders you and accuses you of an offence which is punishable by death or imprisonment, then specific damage doesn't have to be proved. Similarly if the slander is against your professional ability or trade or imputes unchastity to any woman or girl, specific damages need not be proved.

The other differance is that the statute of limitations for slander is 3 years, for libel it is 6.

Vulpiner

Thirdfox wrote:

Defamation:

e.g. if person said "you are a paedophile" to you (and only you) then there is no third party involved and defamation has not taken place.

Libel is defamation in permanent form e.g. e-mail, letter, articles, posts on boards.ie(!)
Slander is defamation of a transient form e.g. speech, broadcast.

This has happened recently on the Boards. Someone was accused of being someone else, someone that does not have pleasant associations in the minds of many on the boards, and had their name placed on the Wikapedia for all to see.

According to your definition lible has taken place, hasnt it? So would the boards be responsible for besmirching this persons good name?

Thirdfox

Depends on what action was taken by moderators etc. I would think. (Just a student so no real knowledge of how these things work out in court). If the moderators quickly put a stop to it then liability will be mitigated.

But yes, libel has taken place once the 4 criteria are fulfilled - "The publication of false and defamatory material to a third party without lawful justification."

Whether you'll win a case is different though

I think we had a thread about boards.ie's liability in relation to defamation here a while ago.

See here:
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054916365&highlight=libel

Vulpiner

So libel has taken place. The reason Im asking this is because on Bikipedia (in my original post I said Wikipedia-sorry ) someone has stated that a member of the Boards is an alias of Bubbles, yet this is not true.

Could any of the Mods be held accountable for doing this?

aphex™

Probably not. Because the person thought to be Bubbles will have a low post count. Any Bubbles account is usually discontinued pretty quickly. With a low post count, how can somebody develop a good name for their alias??

Crash

Vulpiner wrote:

So libel has taken place. The reason Im asking this is because on Bikipedia (in my original post I said Wikipedia-sorry ) someone has stated that a member of the Boards is an alias of Bubbles, yet this is not true.

Could any of the Mods be held accountable for doing this?

you could just register and remove it yourself vulpiner.

aphex™

I don't think being labeled as bubbles does much tbh.

Anyway say for example if the biki said somebody was a peado- the user who posted it would be liable. If it was reported and boards did nothing they prolly would be liable. If the user came on the Legal Discussion board and tried to be smug asking if he was defamed on BIKI while not bothering to report it then nobody would be responsible.

And everybody knows the BIKI stinks of BS anyway so it is not like anybody cares/belives what is on there really.

And has Bubbles been convicted of any crimes? No. Would I care if somebody thought I was Bubbles? No.

Thirdfox

Who is Bubbles? (The only Bubbles I know is from the Powerpuff girls... not the one you're talking about then?)

Also this raises a separate issue - can virtual characters be defamed? e.g. "Thirdfox is a paedo" etc. etc. - the person isn't actually defaming me as per se but my avatar and username... (there's another thread here about this entitled "Are we real?" if I remember correctly.)

Vulpiner

Thirdfox wrote:

Who is Bubbles? (The only Bubbles I know is from the Powerpuff girls... not the one you're talking about then?)

Also this raises a separate issue - can virtual characters be defamed? e.g. "Thirdfox is a paedo" etc. etc. - the person isn't actually defaming me as per se but my avatar and username... (there's another thread here about this entitled "Are we real?" if I remember correctly.)

To answer your question, Bubbles is a former Moderator who turned nasty and occasionally pops up under different aliases spreading viruses (and mischief) There has been talk recently of him existing somewhere under an alias and indeed some believe he may still be active as a Moderator. (This is just rumour and not fact) Enough of Bubbles!

Thirdfox

Oh my God... kinda like Agent Smith from the Matrix!

Hobbes

Vulpiner wrote:

Could any of the Mods be held accountable for doing this?

*sigh* Look the entry was put in based on the thread of the detailed incident where we had one group claiming it was Bubbles and another (the person named) claiming it was them.

The edits on Bubbles document in relation to the incident is with the victim who didn't want personal information posted. Which was removed by myself at that time and changed to be as least detail to the incident while still recording it.

Now if you or another believe information to be incorrect in the Biki, then you just register an account and just edit it out (with comment as to why in the comment field) and it is generally left as is.

Openly offensive comments are routinely edited out and people banned for it.

If you have an issue with history information left behind you need to speak to an Admin to remove it as the nature of the biki is to record peoples entries.

gastonlv

My friend (fiancé') recently took over a position as Credit Director for a casino.

Several employees she believes are angry because she replaced their previous boss who played favorites with them at the expense of other workers. The work environment has become almost hostile. She has had to write up several employees which has created more hostility. She is working with HR to improve the atmosphere through training and meetings but to no avail.

Here’s my question. Several of these disgruntled employees have signed a statement and turned it in to HR accusing her of being a racist. They have sent emails back and forth also attacking her competency and their efforts to undermine her authority. Can this statement be considered defamatory?

My friend winces when she hears any racist or derogatory remark. I know she is not racist and has gone beyond the usual bounds to try and please her workers. If anything I’d label her a bunny hugger.

landser

To the OP, don't bother going down the "is it or is it not defamation" road. The best way to deal with the situation is to report the matter to HR. Advise them of the remarks made and that it is causing you stress. They will have to act. if they don't (or if their actions are ineffective) and the abuse continues, the ultimate sanction that you could take would be an action for stress against them.

Any defamation action is expensive, usually lengthy and given the facts set out by you, it is far from certain that you would succeed. Even if you did, is your co-worker a mark for any award of damages made against them in your favour? Probably not

haz

gastonlv wrote:

Several of these disgruntled employees have signed a statement and turned it in to HR accusing her of being a racist. They have sent emails back and forth also attacking her competency and their efforts to undermine her authority. Can this statement be considered defamatory?

A workplace complaint is covered by qualified privilege for the purposes of investigation. It is up to the employer's investigation to determine whether the complaint is frivolous or malicious.

Don't play up to this stuff - nobody wins a defamation action unless they're charging fees.

gastonlv

Thank you both for your informative replies.