# Question about libel **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 28, 2003, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-libel/184903 "2003-06-28T02:28:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![The\_Great\_Unwashed](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_great_unwashed/32/4791_2.png) [@The\_Great\_Unwashed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Great_Unwashed)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2003, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-libel/184903/21 "2003-06-28T16:15:18Z")
It must be hard to type with that wand in your mouth. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2003, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-libel/184903/22 "2003-06-28T17:01:32Z")
Actually in US defamation cases (libel or slander) in most states, an “intent to cause injury” must be proven, a common law principle dating to the earliest days of Parliament. (source : my tort law prof., Dr. Steven Blakeney @ UCF). Thus, putting up a sign saying “this guy next to me is a jerk” is acceptable under the law (ie. a lawsuit will be thrown out unless there is some evidence that you produced this sign to injure him and his reputation- the fact that you obviously did isn’t enough), although you could theoretically be prosecuted under a couple of general-purpose statutes (all of which are lower degree misdemeanors). However, if you put up a sign saying “buy ye not this house, for the owner is an arse”, the intent to cause injury/harm is clear from the text of the sign, and you are then subject to suit. IMHO, you want the fella gone, so put up a sign saying “I love this guy- buy his house”. Or go with the devil worship thing (though your homeowner’s association may have a few words on THAT) ---
**Author:** ![Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otto)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2003, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-libel/184903/23 "2003-06-28T18:15:58Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Fear Itself \* > \*\*Probably inviting a lawsuit. But nothing prevents you from posting signs like, “Caution: Fire Ant Infestation,” or “Property Quarantined for West Nile Virus.” \*\* Nothing except the lawsuit that will undoubtedly follow because you have damaged your neighbor by lowering the value of his property by posting false statements. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2003, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-libel/184903/24 "2003-06-28T18:28:21Z")
Here’s some free legal advice: Let it go. Get on with your life. ---
**Author:** ![Shade](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2bfe46/32.png) [@Shade](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shade)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2003, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-libel/184903/25 "2003-06-28T20:19:20Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by dutchboy208 \* > **Thus, putting up a sign saying “this guy next to me is a jerk” is acceptable under the law (ie. a lawsuit will be thrown out unless there is some evidence that you produced this sign to injure him and his reputation- the fact that you obviously did isn’t enough)** So posting on a message board that you wanted to put a sign up to make it harder for him to sell his house doesn’t count? I don’t want to drag the hijack much further, but just point out that as **Bricker** was complaining about ill-informed posts, not irrelevant posts, posting a guess would have been hypocritical. FTR I think a slew of posts is better than one guess as it shows the guess isn’t gospel. It’d be nice to wait for a lawyer, (or search for old threads on libel - there must be a lot) ---
**Author:** ![Shade](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2bfe46/32.png) [@Shade](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shade)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2003, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-libel/184903/26 "2003-06-28T20:20:36Z")
…but I can’t be bothered (sorry) [oops, sorry for the double post] ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2003, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-libel/184903/27 "2003-06-28T20:26:58Z")
LOL shade… I suppose that would count, if for some reason the guy’s neighbour is a Doper and happened to read about his post and subpoenaed this thread… But since he’s a jerk I doubt it because we’re all nice people 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2003, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-libel/184903/28 "2003-06-28T20:28:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Shade \* > \*\* > It’d be nice to wait for a lawyer, (or search for old threads on libel - there must be a lot) \*\* A couple of lawyers have already responded to this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Peter\_Morris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peter_morris/32/359_2.png) [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2003, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-libel/184903/29 "2003-06-28T21:02:47Z")
So, you hate your neighbour and out of sheer spite you want to stop him selling his property. Are you sure **he** is the jerk, and not you? Get over it, man. Let him sell up, then you never have to see him again. Why would anyone care if the person they are buying from is a jerk, anyway? Although I can see potential buyers forming a certain opinion of you, and not wanting to live next door to you. ---
**Author:** ![Colophon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f05b48/32.png) [@Colophon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colophon)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2003, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-libel/184903/30 "2003-06-28T21:07:03Z")
This thread reminds me of Alan Partridge interviewing Conrad Knight: > [@](#): > > AP: “Now, a review of your autobiography, ‘Agent in New York’…” > CK: “‘A Gent in New York’.” > AP: “…Yes, the review famously used the title as its headline, but changed the first two letters, so it was ‘A _Something_ in New York’.” > CK: “Yes. I took that newspaper to court for libel…” > AP: “And lost! Making legal history, I believe, as the only person that can quite legally be referred to as a… that word that we can’t say on air?” > CK: “That is correct. But only in print.” > AP: “So I couldn’t call you that word to your face?” > CK: “No, but you could fax me… and people do do that…” And just to atone for that total highjack, I will add that English libel law has the defence of “fair comment”, which is intended to protect reviewers of artistic works, but that does not apply to comments about people, I believe. Anyway, here’s a good site to study: [http://www.hfac.uh.edu/comm/media\_libel/index.html](http://www.hfac.uh.edu/comm/media_libel/index.html) - see especially the “What is libel?” sections. ---
**Author:** ![Cliffy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/59ef9b/32.png) [@Cliffy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cliffy)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2003, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-libel/184903/31 "2003-06-30T18:29:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Desmostylus \* > \*\*You didn’t put a winkie at the end of you post, **Bricker** , so I’ll assume that you’re being serious. > > How’s about you actually provide an answer, instead of just compaining? \*\* The reason **Bricker** is not providing an answer is, I am assuming, because the accurate information (namely, **Jojo** is incorrect; statements of opinion, which this seems to be, are not actionable as defamation) might lead the OP to think that he has received an attorney’s impiratur to go ahead and post the sign. Then, when the OP is sued for defamation (a suit which is defensible but will take time and money to win), tortious interference, false lights, interntional infliction of emotional distress, tortious publication of private information, and probably a few other things (some of which the OP would win, some he might lose), he might in turn sue **Bricker** for allegedly giving him faulty legal advice. That’s why most of the attorneys on this board, while we’re happy to educate people about how the law works, refuse to answer specific legal questions – inevitably we don’t know all the facts, we’re typically not expert in the particular area of law asked about, and in most cases we’re not licensed in the applicable jurisdiction – where the law (_especially_ in the matter of defamation) might be very different than it is in most other places. In this instance, there’s very little any conscientious attorney could say to combat the incorrect information presented on this thread without seeming like he was approving of the specific action in the original post – and that’s something no halfway-competent attorney would do. –Cliffy P.S. **Blalron** , I’m not your attorney and you are not my client. Given my ignorance of the facts, that I am not an expert in the law of defamation, and that I’m not licensed in your jurisdiction, I am not competent to advise you (or anyone else) in this matter. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2003, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-libel/184903/32 "2003-06-30T18:54:17Z")
Yup. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-about-libel/184903.md?page=1)