If Isaac Arthur turns out to be some kind of kiddy fiddling plant pot spunk sprayer I'll just give up on this whole internet thing.

 

Danny Masterson

 

Spacey has followed Weinstein into rehab.

 

So I’m a sexual predator now? Haha ok. Keep pushing it, there are both laws against online harassment and against false accusations and if I wanted it wouldn’t be difficult to press charges for libel and defamation of character. You can give anyone a good natured ribbing but when you cross over into defamation I am warning you now, you know I have the financial means and time to go after you. So cut it out.

 

So you're saying you just want to go in the IMDb for Hollywood Celebrities who Make Idle Threats?

 

"Hello. internet police? Diggy from the JCC called me a pervert, and I wish to press charges."

 

very scary

 

Unless Diggy has some proof, he just committed a real life crime. It doesn't matter if he published the libel online (on a very public forum, where Bowen's account is very clearly linked to his real life identity and business).

 

This forum hasn't been "very public" since the prequels.

 

As you apparently don't even know the difference between civil and criminal law...

 

lol yeah the appropriate phrase now would probably be "technically public".

 

well there was chef jeff.

at least darth guy will get this.

 

If it's a tort you don't press charges, you bring damages.

It's less serious than say, fraud - like creating fake Amazon accounts to review your own book.

 

Also, Bowen, here's the thing. Libel is a form of defamation. Libel is defaming someone in a printed statement; slander is defaming someone by words spoken.

Saying "press charges for libel and defamation of character" is not only wrong because it confuses civil and criminal law, it's also a tautology.

What you meant to say was "I have the means to seek damages for libel, and will."

I'm not an expert in American law, but you might have a hurdle.

Defamation in the US is defined as "the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government, or nation a negative image."

The first challenge would be to prove that your image had been damaged or diminished by Diggy's claim. I'm not forming a view either way, but I would argue that this is not an easy task. You could argue that your signature links to your works and therefore a person could tie a link between your forum profile, and the allegations made and then form a negative view of your character which would influence them away from buying your books, but based on metrics provided by Amazon I don't think you can argue the book's sales would be impacted either. I mean, if people aren't buying them because they want some proximity to a man who drives a plastic car and thinks it is luxury, then I don't know what is wrong with the world.

Again, I'm not an expert but I expect your better course of action here might be to make a remark about the promiscuity of Diggy's mother, in response, rather than threatening legal action.

 

And this is why Ender is the best pro bono publico lawyer money can buy.

 

Punk's Mum doesn't. No bra required when you're on the pole.

 

Well that won't be an issue after Brexit.

 

Well that won't be an issue after Brexit.

 

Diggy is the lovechild of Lady Di and Iggy Pop.

 

Mother had a lust for life. Shame how that turned out.