[EVA] [META]ADV Platinum booklets reliability

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

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.
>>
>> --Aaron
>>     
>
> 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?"
> --Shotetsu
>
>   
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.