jdobbin Posted June 28, 2008 Report Share Posted June 28, 2008 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...PStory/National The media should not live in constant fear of facing a libel suit every time a provocative commentary is published or broadcast, the Supreme Court of Canada said yesterday in a major ruling won by controversial Vancouver radio broadcaster Rafe Mair.In a 9-0 decision that modernizes the defence of fair comment, the court found that Mr. Mair did not defame Christian-values advocate Kari Simpson when he denounced her stand on a book-banning controversy. It is an important decision to give lower courts guidance when this type of thing comes up again. What it does is: The comment must be on a matter of public interest.It must be based on fact. Although it can include inferences of fact, the comment must be recognizable as comment. It must be capable of satisfying the question: Could any person honestly express that opinion on the proved facts? My only question is does it apply to forums, blogs and other aspects of commentary. I wonder if our resident lawyers know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 29, 2008 Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 While I agree with the decision, the cynic in me says that if it had been a conservative talk show host disparaging gays, instead of a liberal one disparaging Christians, the court would have swung in the other direction. This is not a court guided by much more than its own political biases and agendas, after all, nor is it noted for its great wisdom or judgment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Hayward Posted June 29, 2008 Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 Any ruling in favour of freedom of speech is a good ruling. It seems that the courts are starting to change direction on this issue, for the better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTA Lawyer Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...PStory/NationalMy only question is does it apply to forums, blogs and other aspects of commentary. I wonder if our resident lawyers know. I think there can be no other interpretation than the case applies to any public commentary. What is important to note is that the fair comment defence only applies to comment not "reporting of facts". It is not the medium you choose, but the substance of your statements that matters. If you wrongfully post here as a matter of fact that FTA is not actually a certified lawyer and is just lying to everyone to boost his credibility, then you are defaming me and are not protected. If you post that FTA is primarily a criminal lawyer and therefore is a bonehead when it comes to non-criminal issues, then you are commenting with your fair opinion based on fact, and therfore, even if your post defames me, you are protected. Now, of course, since I answered your question, you're not going to give such a nasty opinion of me are you? FTA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Doors Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 If you wrongfully post here as a matter of fact that FTA is not actually a certified lawyer and is just lying to everyone to boost his credibility, then you are defaming me and are not protected. Not sure about that as you are FTA, a handle - not a person with a name and address. I am unsure if I would be able to defame 'FTA' as FTA is not a legal entity. A ruling on this matter can only be a few years away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 If you wrongfully post here as a matter of fact that FTA is not actually a certified lawyer and is just lying to everyone to boost his credibility, then you are defaming me and are not protected.If you post that FTA is primarily a criminal lawyer and therefore is a bonehead when it comes to non-criminal issues, then you are commenting with your fair opinion based on fact, and therfore, even if your post defames me, you are protected. Now, of course, since I answered your question, you're not going to give such a nasty opinion of me are you? Thanks. That's what I thought it covered. I think it is important to have a strong legal ruling on the issue of fair comment. With so many challenges ending up in court, an actual definition of fair comment needed to be outlined. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTA Lawyer Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 Not sure about that as you are FTA, a handle - not a person with a name and address. I am unsure if I would be able to defame 'FTA' as FTA is not a legal entity. A ruling on this matter can only be a few years away. It was just an example for illustration...I'm aware that "FTA" is not a legal entity... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Doors Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 carry on then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.