Cardinal Fang
05-28-2007, 11:10 AM
Don't ask me why this has gotten to me but after reading the rather drawn out thread about Vlad's problems at M.O.T. a rather interesting point popped up that got me thinking. One poster made accusations against a tech. at M.O.T. on repairs that caused harm to his car. That tech supposedly now has signed up or someone has signed up to defend him against those accusations.
http://www.torontomazda3.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=18274&page=7
Basically, the tech in question Mo never worked on the car. He had spoken to the poster SP33D 3 but he himself never did the work. So now we have Mo claiming "defamation of character" and then Broli stating this is "a free place to make opinions."
Apart from me being an annoying asshat and raising my post count I’m going to take this opportunity to give you people some advice as I see it. Take if for what it’s worth from someone with experience in this field (defamation on the internet).
I’ve ranted before about the state of how you some of you guys like to post. Basically, I struggle to understand what it is you are trying to say. Much of it has to do with the abbreviations but a fair amount has to do with piss poor communication skills. I can’t negate the fact some of you have English as a second language and to that I’d like to say that I truly understand. I understand because English is MY second language. But you guys have to understand a few things when you are posting. The Internet is an interesting place. The fact that many people use handles and post from computers in offices far far way gives them a sense of courage they might otherwise not have. They feel more relaxed and as a result have no problems making statements off the cuff to make their point. They never have to make those accusations face to face so their sense of responsibility when it comes to making claims somehow disappears.
This couldn’t be further from the truth and you guys need to understand this. As Broli stated this is forum is a place to exchange opinions freely. However this freedom is not without responsibility. What you post has repercussions. Especially when you name someone outside of their handle or someone that works for a company. People think that the internet is a place where you can say and do what you want and that somehow you are protected by freedom of speech at all costs. For those of you who think this I ask you to stop watching so much farking television. Whatever you post on here should be treated as if you said it to that person’s face. Simple as that! Take the time to write you’re post. Mean what you say and say what you mean.
Having said that, it is possible to defame someone’s character online. Under Canadian Law “defamation of character” has to meet a set of standards. They are as follows:
It does not matter if the defamation was intentional or the result of negligence. Defamatory material is presumed to be false and malicious.
Defamation must be a direct attack on an actual reputation, not an alleged reputation that a "victim" believes they deserve.
The remarks must be harmful (i.e. "defamatory") and this will be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
The defamatory remark must be clearly aimed at the plaintiff. General, inflammatory remarks aimed at a large audience would not qualify, as the remarks must be clearly pointed at a specific person.
The defamatory remarks must be somehow conveyed to a third party.Standards above taken from Law Society of Upper Canada.
Many cases of defamation are defended under the pretext that the individual making the comments honestly believe his comments to be true. “The rule of thumb is that the fair comment must reflect an honestly held opinion based on proven fact and not motivated by malice.” Here’s a good example. I think Broli is can be an asshat at times. That’s not defamation if I honestly believe he’s an ass. I may be incorrect in that assumption but I honestly believed it. I know I’m saying this to hurt him so that implies malice and therefore my argument about my honest belief is null and void and subsequently I’ve defamed Broli. Let me clear something up. I don’t think Broli is an ass. But don’t get me started on majic. Furthermore, me calling Broli an asshat wouldn’t qualify as defamation because frankly….”Broli” isn’t a person. It’s a handle. I’d have to name the individual and go after his reputation for it to be even noticed by the courts.
So where are we in all this? SP33D 3 called out Mo from M.O.T. incorrectly mind you but he still did it. He honestly believed the person he was talking to did the repairs. His comments were an honest mistake based on what he honestly thought at the time. That’s not defamation as Mo claimed. SP33D 3 was right to apologize and I commend him for it. The point of my entire diatribe is this. WATCH WHAT YOU FARKING SAY! Be accurate in your assessment and what you end up posting. We post a lot about other dealerships and businesses through the reviews. So there can be a fine line where people reading it can perceive your opinion as fact. Your rants should be specific to the issue at hand. If you’re not sure then say so or don’t say it at all.
http://www.torontomazda3.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=18274&page=7
Basically, the tech in question Mo never worked on the car. He had spoken to the poster SP33D 3 but he himself never did the work. So now we have Mo claiming "defamation of character" and then Broli stating this is "a free place to make opinions."
Apart from me being an annoying asshat and raising my post count I’m going to take this opportunity to give you people some advice as I see it. Take if for what it’s worth from someone with experience in this field (defamation on the internet).
I’ve ranted before about the state of how you some of you guys like to post. Basically, I struggle to understand what it is you are trying to say. Much of it has to do with the abbreviations but a fair amount has to do with piss poor communication skills. I can’t negate the fact some of you have English as a second language and to that I’d like to say that I truly understand. I understand because English is MY second language. But you guys have to understand a few things when you are posting. The Internet is an interesting place. The fact that many people use handles and post from computers in offices far far way gives them a sense of courage they might otherwise not have. They feel more relaxed and as a result have no problems making statements off the cuff to make their point. They never have to make those accusations face to face so their sense of responsibility when it comes to making claims somehow disappears.
This couldn’t be further from the truth and you guys need to understand this. As Broli stated this is forum is a place to exchange opinions freely. However this freedom is not without responsibility. What you post has repercussions. Especially when you name someone outside of their handle or someone that works for a company. People think that the internet is a place where you can say and do what you want and that somehow you are protected by freedom of speech at all costs. For those of you who think this I ask you to stop watching so much farking television. Whatever you post on here should be treated as if you said it to that person’s face. Simple as that! Take the time to write you’re post. Mean what you say and say what you mean.
Having said that, it is possible to defame someone’s character online. Under Canadian Law “defamation of character” has to meet a set of standards. They are as follows:
It does not matter if the defamation was intentional or the result of negligence. Defamatory material is presumed to be false and malicious.
Defamation must be a direct attack on an actual reputation, not an alleged reputation that a "victim" believes they deserve.
The remarks must be harmful (i.e. "defamatory") and this will be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
The defamatory remark must be clearly aimed at the plaintiff. General, inflammatory remarks aimed at a large audience would not qualify, as the remarks must be clearly pointed at a specific person.
The defamatory remarks must be somehow conveyed to a third party.Standards above taken from Law Society of Upper Canada.
Many cases of defamation are defended under the pretext that the individual making the comments honestly believe his comments to be true. “The rule of thumb is that the fair comment must reflect an honestly held opinion based on proven fact and not motivated by malice.” Here’s a good example. I think Broli is can be an asshat at times. That’s not defamation if I honestly believe he’s an ass. I may be incorrect in that assumption but I honestly believed it. I know I’m saying this to hurt him so that implies malice and therefore my argument about my honest belief is null and void and subsequently I’ve defamed Broli. Let me clear something up. I don’t think Broli is an ass. But don’t get me started on majic. Furthermore, me calling Broli an asshat wouldn’t qualify as defamation because frankly….”Broli” isn’t a person. It’s a handle. I’d have to name the individual and go after his reputation for it to be even noticed by the courts.
So where are we in all this? SP33D 3 called out Mo from M.O.T. incorrectly mind you but he still did it. He honestly believed the person he was talking to did the repairs. His comments were an honest mistake based on what he honestly thought at the time. That’s not defamation as Mo claimed. SP33D 3 was right to apologize and I commend him for it. The point of my entire diatribe is this. WATCH WHAT YOU FARKING SAY! Be accurate in your assessment and what you end up posting. We post a lot about other dealerships and businesses through the reviews. So there can be a fine line where people reading it can perceive your opinion as fact. Your rants should be specific to the issue at hand. If you’re not sure then say so or don’t say it at all.