sethg@athena.mit.edu (Seth Gordon) (12/10/88)
nyssa@terminus.UUCP (The Prime Minister) in <13734@terminus.UUCP>: `Well, if Brad can read this, according to my understanding of the `laws down here, you will win a law suit for libel and defamation of `character. What *is* your understanding of the laws down here? In order to win a libel case, you have to prove the libeler made a *false* *and* *damaging* statement about the libelee. Sure, what JEDR has done might have damaged Templeton's reputation, but was any of it *false*? (If discussion of this continues, and I have time, I can dig up the AP libel manual and look up the technical legal definition.) Besides, a libel suit would cost JEDR a lot of money and time, even if he won the suit. To impose such a penalty on him, only for posting some articles and talking to some reporters, sounds like... censorship. Amusing, eh? Also, according to my understanding of the laws up there, distributing racist humor, as rec.humor.funny did, is *illegal* in Canada; a recent K-W Record article quoted a member of the Canadian Human Rights Commission as verifying this. -- "Some people get results, I get consequences." --Jimmy Durante : bloom-beacon!athena.mit.edu!sethg / standard disclaimer : Seth Gordon / MIT Brnch., PO Box 53, Cambridge, MA 02139
allen@sulaco.Sigma.COM (Allen Gwinn) (12/10/88)
In article <8386@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> sethg@athena.mit.edu (Seth Gordon) writes: >Besides, a libel suit would cost JEDR a lot of money and time, even if >he won the suit. To impose such a penalty on him, only for posting some >articles and talking to some reporters, sounds like... censorship. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^ Gee, that knife sure seems to cut both ways, doesn't it! >Amusing, eh? Sure is... -- Allen Gwinn ...sulaco!allen Disclaimer: The opinions are my own "I occasionally have exchanged [racist] jokes in private company, but never [in earshot of a reporter]"--Luisa D'Amato, Byline Editor for the Kitchener- Waterloo Record (reporter who wrote story critical of Brad Templeton).
jpdres10@usl-pc.usl.edu (Green Eric Lee) (12/11/88)
In message <8386@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>, sethg@athena.mit.edu (Seth Gordon) says: >nyssa@terminus.UUCP (The Prime Minister) in <13734@terminus.UUCP>: >What *is* your understanding of the laws down here? In order to win a >libel case, you have to prove the libeler made a *false* *and* >*damaging* statement about the libelee. Sure, what JEDR has done might >have damaged Templeton's reputation, but was any of it *false*? >Also, according to my understanding of the laws up there, distributing >racist humor, as rec.humor.funny did, is *illegal* in Canada; a recent >K-W Record article quoted a member of the Canadian Human Rights >Commission as verifying this. Sort of reminds me of a radio show Harlan Ellison did some years back. After cracking several Jewish jokes, a caller called accusing him of being a racist. "Hey," he said, "some of my best friends are Jews! Like my mother, my father, me..." Isaac Asimov is another author who has a large repertoire of Jewish jokes. Again, some of his best friends.... mother, father, him... etc. Where Brad was libeled was when someone said that the Jewish joke he posted was racist. Unfortunately, while it would be difficult to impossible to prove that it was racist, it is also difficult to prove that it is NOT racist, which is what he'd have to prove in a libel suit. (how do you PROVE something is racist? Just the mentioning of an ethnic name and a quality commonly associated with that name? Like "Isaac Asimov is a Jew. Isaac Asimov is rich" is racist?). -- Eric Lee Green P.O. Box 92191, Lafayette, LA 70509 {ames,mit-eddie,osu-cis,...}!killer!elg, killer!usl!elg, etc.
dave@lsuc.uucp (David Sherman) (12/14/88)
sethg@athena.mit.edu (Seth Gordon) writes: >Also, according to my understanding of the laws up there, distributing >racist humor, as rec.humor.funny did, is *illegal* in Canada; a recent >K-W Record article quoted a member of the Canadian Human Rights >Commission as verifying this. Don't believe everything you read in the papers. I doubt the person quoted subscribes to Usenet. Wilfully spreading false news that is likely to cause injury to the public interest is illegal in Canada (Criminal Code, s.177). Ernst Zundel was convicted under that provision. Promoting hatred against an identifiable group is also illegal (Criminal Code, s.281.2). James Keegstra was convicted under that provision. (Both cases may still end up at the Supreme Court of Canada.) As a committed and outspoken member of the Jewish community and as a lawyer, I followed the Zundel and Keegstra cases fairly keenly. Readers of soc.culture.jewish and misc.legal will recall my strong defense of those convictions: despite the U.S. concept of free speech over all other concerns, I support the Canadian courts' balancing approach. My opinion is, however, that the jokes Brad posted to rec.humor.funny were not such as would constitute anything approaching a violation of either s.177 or s.281.2 or the Criminal Code. Zundel and Keegstra are extreme cases. Suggesting that Brad is in the same category is nonsense. I speak for myself, as a lawyer and a Jew, but not on behalf of the Law Society. David Sherman The Law Society of Upper Canada Toronto -- Moderator, mail.yiddish { uunet!attcan att pyramid!utai utzoo } !lsuc!dave
bill@twwells.uucp (T. William Wells) (12/15/88)
In article <8386@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> sethg@athena.mit.edu (Seth Gordon) writes:
: Besides, a libel suit would cost JEDR a lot of money and time, even if
: he won the suit. To impose such a penalty on him, only for posting some
: articles and talking to some reporters, sounds like... censorship.
: Amusing, eh?
No, not amusing. Merely irrelevant.
Consider the consequences of prohibiting suing a person for libel:
the lack of remedy when one is libeled. The alternative is that some
people will be put to the trouble of defending themselves against
suits, even if not at fault.
Though that latter might be a kind of censorship, the former is far
worse, eh?
---
Bill
{uunet|novavax}!proxftl!twwells!bill