Comments on: Notice to Britain http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2005/03/notice_to_brita.html Dispatches from a Small Business Sun, 12 Feb 2012 09:39:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Max Lybbert http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2005/03/notice_to_brita.html/comment-page-1#comment-928 Max Lybbert Fri, 25 Mar 2005 01:50:36 +0000 http://coyote-blog.com/wordpress/2005/03/notice_to_brita.html#comment-928 <p>I always understood that in the English-speaking world "truth is a perfect defense against libel." That is, if you can prove what you said was true, then it isn't libel in any way. There goes the defamation of character claim.</p> <p>However, the unauthorized use of likeness is a little harder. If the attorney is considered a public official, or the movie is considered news reporting, or the attorney knew or should have had the common sense to figure out he was being taped for later playback, that claim will be dismissed immediately. Otherwise, he may have a case.</p> <p>If the movie brought in enough dough to fund a countersuit (such as "misuse of a legal process" and related "tortious interference with trade" claims), then this could hurt the attorney more than it helps him, especially if it gets media attention. And we know how well the media reports what the media does.</p> I always understood that in the English-speaking world “truth is a perfect defense against libel.” That is, if you can prove what you said was true, then it isn’t libel in any way. There goes the defamation of character claim.

However, the unauthorized use of likeness is a little harder. If the attorney is considered a public official, or the movie is considered news reporting, or the attorney knew or should have had the common sense to figure out he was being taped for later playback, that claim will be dismissed immediately. Otherwise, he may have a case.

If the movie brought in enough dough to fund a countersuit (such as “misuse of a legal process” and related “tortious interference with trade” claims), then this could hurt the attorney more than it helps him, especially if it gets media attention. And we know how well the media reports what the media does.

]]> By: Kory O http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2005/03/notice_to_brita.html/comment-page-1#comment-927 Kory O Thu, 24 Mar 2005 19:03:38 +0000 http://coyote-blog.com/wordpress/2005/03/notice_to_brita.html#comment-927 <p>It's all about the publicity. He gets his name in the paper, maybe gets a few more really fat kids to sue Wendy's, and all he has to do is pay a little to his secretary to type up the paperwork. </p> It’s all about the publicity. He gets his name in the paper, maybe gets a few more really fat kids to sue Wendy’s, and all he has to do is pay a little to his secretary to type up the paperwork.

]]> By: dearieme http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2005/03/notice_to_brita.html/comment-page-1#comment-926 dearieme Thu, 24 Mar 2005 15:06:51 +0000 http://coyote-blog.com/wordpress/2005/03/notice_to_brita.html#comment-926 <p>Our English libel laws are indeed odious: we also have a system whereby you can go to court to get a judicial order to prohibit a newspaper publishing various things about you. A defect in this latter procedure is that the Scottish papers can publish gaily, irrespective of what the English courts say. Yippee.</p> Our English libel laws are indeed odious: we also have a system whereby you can go to court to get a judicial order to prohibit a newspaper publishing various things about you. A defect in this latter procedure is that the Scottish papers can publish gaily, irrespective of what the English courts say. Yippee.

]]>