[EVA] [META]ADV Platinum booklets reliability
obsessivemathsfreak at obsessivemathsfreak.org
Mon Jan 11 23:19:26 EST 2010
Gwern Branwen wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Aaron Clark <aaronc1 at umbc.edu> wrote:
>>> Actually, you *aren't* using it appropriately.
>>> V's statements on this list would be 'libel', because they are
>>> written; only if he had, to use your own reference, chose to audibly
>>> 'utter' those statements would they be 'slander'.
>> Interesting. Good to know. Thanks. You learn something new every day.
> Just to make it clear I'm not being hostile or anything, a quick anecdote:
> I learned the distinction back in elementary school when I was reading
> a collection of _Encyclopedia Brown_ stories. In one case, Bugs Meany
> attempts to further his crooked schemes by forging a note from a
> judge; but alas, he mixes up slander and libel, and Encyclopedia Brown
> correctly notes that no lawyer, and certainly no judge, would ever be
> so careless as to write 'slander' where he meant 'libel' - thereby
> foiling Bugs Meany yet again!
> Strange how childhood remains with one so.
> "In the space of one night
> I seem to forget so much!
> How is it, then,
> that my dreams of the past
> yet remain so clear?"
As an interesting aside, it should be noted that by the nature of
internet based discussions, it possible for parties to engage in
so-called "libel tourism"; in particular, "I'll sue you in England"
comes to the fore here.
In England, truth is not a defence for libel. For example, eve _if_ it
was true that FUNimation
were tricking people into buying the worst DVD ever made, V's statements
could still be libellous as they simply "defamed" FUNimation.
More information about the evangelion