• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

NHL Smarch 2015 |OT| Toronto is tanking on purpose this time.

S

Simon Belmont

Banned
Calamari41 said:
I don't know man, it's a clear joke rather than an accusation of actual infidelity or wrongdoing. By this logic, can I sue for defamation the 12 year old who calls me a gay slur on Xbox Live if I record the statement?
Click to expand...

Well no, because he's 12, he's not doing it in a public forum, and it would be impossible to prove damages.

In this case it's not obvious in the context that he's making a joke

You're not using the same logic there at all. The same logic would be taking out an ad in the Globe and Mail, or putting up a billboard to the same effect. Twitter is not the same as talking to your friends in person, and people should realize that.
 
S

Simon Belmont

Banned
lamaroo said:
Louis CK jokes about fucking peoples pets, among other terrible things. There are better and worse things to joke about, it was clearly a joke. Late night talk show hosts say worse things about celebrities during their monologues.

If this guy were a hockey blogger or something it would clearly be a different story. He's just some random dude who made a stupid joke. The only reason it's funny is because TSN failed to do their job and put it on TV.
Click to expand...
You're missing the fact that people watch late night tv and Louis ck expecting it to be a joke. The context is going to matter.
 
C

Calamari41

41 > 38
Simon Belmont said:
Well no, because he's 12, he's not doing it in a public forum, and it would be impossible to prove damages.

In this case it's not obvious in the context that he's making a joke

You're not using the same logic there at all. The same logic would be taking out an ad in the Globe and Mail, or putting up a billboard to the same effect. Twitter is not the same as talking to your friends in person, and people should realize that.
Click to expand...

See to me, posting on my shitty Twitter account is not equivalent to taking out an ad in a newspaper. If he knew that adding the hashtag was going to put it on TV then it's a different story though, as I said before.

For 99% of the population, posting something on Twitter is indeed the same thing as talking to your friends. And honestly, for Phaneuf to argue that the post was not a clear joke creates the illusion that the post was true.
 
S

Simon Belmont

Banned
Calamari41 said:
See to me, posting on my shitty Twitter account is not equivalent to taking out an ad in a newspaper. If he knew that adding the hashtag was going to put it on TV then it's a different story though, as I said before.

For 99% of the population, posting something on Twitter is indeed the same thing as talking to your friends. And honestly, for Phaneuf to argue that the post was not a clear joke creates the illusion that the post was true.
Click to expand...

It's really nice that you think that, but I have a feeling the law is going to look at that very differently.

And if this was my marriage someone just went on television and slandered, I'd be pretty fucking pissed about it.
 
L

lamaroo

Unconfirmed Member
Simon Belmont said:
You're missing the fact that people watch late night tv and Louis ck expecting it to be a joke. The context is going to matter.
Click to expand...

Yes context is important. If this guy were running a blog about hockey, or celebrities, I could see reason to sue, as people would expect him to have some sort of inside connections, or professionalism.
 
C

Calamari41

41 > 38
Simon Belmont said:
It's really nice that you think that, but I have a feeling the law is going to look at that very differently.

And if this was my marriage someone just went on television and slandered, I'd be pretty fucking pissed about it.
Click to expand...

Quote the applicable section of the law then, if it's so clear cut.

The bottom line is that threatening some nobody with a lawsuit not only looks petty, but it also makes the nobody look like maybe they struck some kind of nerve.

TSN definitely deserves severe criticism though.

Edit: wow STL just racked up two while I was typing. Tankaku is real.
 
S

Simon Belmont

Banned
lamaroo said:
Yes context is important. If this guy were running a blog about hockey, or celebrities, I could see reason to sue, as people would expect him to have some sort of inside connections, or professionalism.
Click to expand...

Meh. I hope the guy gets fucked. You don't get to shit on people because they're famous and you're not.

He didn't say "I heard", or I think, he said "fact" which is going to hurt.
 
K

Kuro Madoushi

Unconfirmed Member
go-banana-o.gif
 
C

Calamari41

41 > 38
Simon Belmont said:
Meh. I hope the guy gets fucked. You don't get to shit on people because they're famous and you're not.

He didn't say "I heard", or I think, he said "fact" which is going to hurt.
Click to expand...

I can see where you're coming from and move towards agreeing with you of it was clear that putting the hashtag in the post would put you on TV.
 
S

Simon Belmont

Banned
Calamari41 said:
Quote the applicable section of the law then, if it's so clear cut.

The bottom line is that threatening some nobody with a lawsuit not only looks petty, but it also makes the nobody look like maybe they struck some kind of nerve.

TSN definitely deserves severe criticism though.

Edit: wow STL just racked up two while I was typing. Tankaku is real.
Click to expand...

The section of law that says you can't go on a public forum and state for a fact something you know not to be true happened?

You can look up libel laws as easily as I can.


Edit: also the truth is a defense against libel which is why people who are 'guilty' rarely sue for it.
 
L

lamaroo

Unconfirmed Member
Simon Belmont said:
Meh. I hope the guy gets fucked. You don't get to shit on people because they're famous and you're not.

He didn't say "I heard", or I think, he said "fact" which is going to hurt.
Click to expand...

You see I think people should definitely face legal consequences for hate speech and the like, but I don't think something like this would qualify.

Maybe it's the fact that I'm not married, or that we joke about that kind of stuff here all of the time, but it just doesn't seem worth it to me.
 
C

Calamari41

41 > 38
Simon Belmont said:
The section of law that says you can't go on a public forum and state for a fact something you know not to be true happened?

You can look up libel laws as easily as I can.
Click to expand...

If Twitter (and Facebook and Tumblr etc etc) are subject to the same level of libel law scrutiny as a paid ad in a newspaper would be, then a whole hell of a lot of people are on their way to getting massive fines. Half of us in this thread are done for.

And again, as I said, if it was clear that the hashtag would put him on TV, then I'm pretty much with you.
 
K

Kuro Madoushi

Unconfirmed Member
lamaroo said:
You see I think people should definitely face legal consequences for hate speech and the like, but I don't think something like this would qualify.

Maybe it's the fact that I'm not married, or that we joke about that kind of stuff here all of the time, but it just doesn't seem worth it to me.
Click to expand...
And that's why it's not hate speech but slander. Really it falls on both TSN and this idiot for the whole controversy. If Phaneuf didn't threaten, I don't see an apology given the 'it's not my fault that TSN put it up there it was a joke defense'.

Shit on Phaneuf for being a pylon or a bad player and there is no lawsuit. Make it personal and don't be surprised if they make it personal. The retaliation doesn't fit the crime but I think the point got itself across both with the fucking idiot and TSN.


LOLOL. GO BANANA!!!!!
 
S

Simon Belmont

Banned
Calamari41 said:
If Twitter (and Facebook and Tumblr etc etc) are subject to the same level of libel law scrutiny as a paid ad in a newspaper would be, then a whole hell of a lot of people are on their way to getting massive fines. Half of us in this thread are done for.

And again, as I said, if it was clear that the hashtag would put him on TV, then I'm pretty much with you.
Click to expand...

GAF is a closed forum though, there would be a difference. Most of the time it's not worth pursuing because, well, what are the damages if @joey420bluntz tweets something to his ten followers? It's just a lot easier in this case because of the exposure that it got, and it was set up deliberately to get that exposure.

Just to digress, truth is a defense against Libel. If Lupul did do something, suing would be the worst possible recourse.

lamaroo said:
You see I think people should definitely face legal consequences for hate speech and the like, but I don't think something like this would qualify.

Maybe it's the fact that I'm not married, or that we joke about that kind of stuff here all of the time, but it just doesn't seem worth it to me.
Click to expand...

I hear you, but that is somebody's career and marriage.
 
C

Calamari41

41 > 38
Simon Belmont said:
GAF is a closed forum though, there would be a difference. Most of the time it's not worth pursuing because, well, what are the damages if @joey420bluntz tweets something to his ten followers? It's just a lot easier in this case because of the exposure that it got, and it was set up deliberately to get that exposure.

Just to digress, truth is a defense against Libel. If Lupul did do something, suing would be the worst possible recourse.
Click to expand...

I agree in theory, I guess I'm just of the mindset that TSN is the big fish to go after because they're the ones that allowed this idiot's message to go beyond that hypothetical eight followers. To threaten the random guy himself is a red herring.
 
C

Calamari41

41 > 38
I'm watching Cherry for the first time in my life and wow, it's just like you guys caused me to expect. He just got done saying "That Pat Maroon, what a good guy. Loosened up his straps before the fight? That Maroon is a good guy."
 
K

Kuro Madoushi

Unconfirmed Member
Simon Belmont said:
GAF is a closed forum though, there would be a difference. Most of the time it's not worth pursuing because, well, what are the damages if @joey420bluntz tweets something to his ten followers? It's just a lot easier in this case because of the exposure that it got, and it was set up deliberately to get that exposure.

Just to digress, truth is a defense against Libel. If Lupul did do something, suing would be the worst possible recourse.
Click to expand...
I do wonder if it's the product of the times people are growing up in. When I grew up I had a lot of nasty racist remarks thrown my way and once got surrounded and beat up cause I am Chinese. I complained and all I got was the sticks and stones argument. It most definitely doesn't fly anymore in today's society and it might be a matter of time before people wake up and realize social media doesn't give you the right to say what you want without consequences. The idea you can be held accountable is already there in Europe and I have read a few stories where people got shit for stuff they said on Twitter. Still some people don't get it through their thick skulls sometimes and you get fucking morons like that woman who said she wished Kessel would get cancer again and die. Seriously. Who the hell, even if you're a die hard opposing fan or a rabid Leaf hater, goes and says a guy who survived cancer should get it again and die from it?!?!?!
 
S

Simon Belmont

Banned
Calamari41 said:
I agree in theory, I guess I'm just of the mindset that TSN is the big fish to go after because they're the ones that allowed this idiot's message to go beyond that hypothetical eight followers. To threaten the random guy himself is a red herring.
Click to expand...

Not really, because even if you tweet out something you can use hashtags to make sure more than just your followers see it.

I think more people just need to put the big boy pants on and realize there are certain things you can't say on a public forum.
 
U

Unhandled Exception

Member
Simon Belmont said:
Not really, because even if you tweet out something you can use hashtags to make sure more than just your followers see it.

I think more people just need to put the big boy pants on and realize there are certain things you can't say on a public forum.
Click to expand...

To public figures. Go ahead and keep harassing people who don't get media coverage though.
 
C

Calamari41

41 > 38
Simon Belmont said:
Not really, because even if you tweet out something you can use hashtags to make sure more than just your followers see it.

I think more people just need to put the big boy pants on and realize there are certain things you can't say on a public forum.
Click to expand...

I can see where you're coming from more clearly now. If this guy were made an example of, it wouldn't be a bad thing. Especially since he didn't immediately say "whoa, I'm sorry, that was a dumb joke and I didn't think anybody would even see it and I shouldn't have said it" like any of us would do if one of our dumb insulting joke posts actually got put on TV.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Rivals of Aether II |OT| Smashin Good Time
5
389
Arsic replied
LTTP: Call of Duty Black Ops III (PS4) 2015 via PS5 store
1
1K
Operations66 replied
Earth Defense Force 6 |OT| Not afraid of water
|OT| 2
92
4K
bender replied
Japan Travel |OT| starting out a new journey
Community
12
675
Robot Carnival replied
  • Locked
AI (Artificial Intelligence) |OT| - Embracing Change
|OT|
2
2K
EviLore replied
Top Bottom