Sure, but in the case of Taiwan’s special public insult law, any name-calling is considered an insult, regardless of whether it contained correct or incorrect information.
I was talking about a lawsuit based on false allegation/defamation. Not a lawsuit based on the insulting nature of the statement.
You can end up in court from saying the food wasn’t nice at a restaurant.
I know that, but that’s only because of Taiwan’s special public insult law, which is not the topic of our discussion here.
We are talking about wrongfully accusing someone in a manner in which you are obviously only name-calling or sharing your opinion of the person, rather than maliciously trying to make a false allegation.
So let me rephrase my question: Do you think a lawsuit for making a false statement that someone is a “halfwit” or a “loony” would hold up in court in any other country that doesn’t have Taiwan’s public insult law?
Yes there are many laws in other countries that this will fall under, France has strong public deformation laws also, could come under bullying laws or classes as a verbal assault. Try saying it about the king of Thailand.
Unfortunately, this is probably true.
well, the brit’s lawyer (fucking lin wood) also seemed to do a really shitty job, not using the info musk sent the buzzfeed guy that really made it pretty fucking clear that he seriously thought the guy was a pedo and was trying hard to prove it.
Ok you just listed a bunch more laws that are basically the same as Taiwan’s public insult law.
Insults or bullying are not the topic of our discussion here. We are talking about making false accusations.
Saw this today. I think he’s partly right, but it will take much more than what he said to change the minds of more hard line believers in anything.
You’re talking about calling someone a pedo and now you’re saying.
I’m going dizzy with your argument.
Thats what you asked for, its very common for laws to protect people (and companies) from false accusations.
Edit: Just to add the following information about deformation.
Defamation is the act of communicating to a third party false statements about a person, place or thing that results in damage to its reputation.[1] It can be spoken (slander ) or written (libel ).
(Snip)
There are four distinct systems of tort, and therefore civil defamation, law presently in force in China, three of which are in force in different regions administered by the People’s Republic of China and one of which is in force in the Republic of China. Areas administered by the Republic of China include:
Opinions can be ill informed or ignorant. They certainly can be wrong.
Imo airplanes are too heavy to fly.
Ah, no. They’re not.
Is that right?
Yup.
We were talking about defamation this whole time, and suddenly you started bringing up public insult laws, which is not the same as defamation.
Defamation = false accusations made intentionally
Public insult = name-calling (regardless of whether it is true or false)
So, forget public insult. Let’s focus on defamation. My question is: Do you seriously think that in any country that has defamation laws, one would be successfully sued for simply calling someone a “halfwit” or “loonie” on the internet?
Read back and see who brought up public insults i think it was “some pedo guy” which in my book is a public insult and by default defamation.
Have a thread on the subject
Yes, evidence given up thread.
Now unless you bring something new, like some other people in this thread i will consider this closed.
This sentence is no longer just an opinion. It is also a claim that you are making, which certainly could be true or false.
When I said “there are no wrong opinions” I meant statements like “these halfwit politicians are dumb” or “this loonie attacker should be jailed”.
Now if I changed the above sentences, and instead said “this politician is a halfwit who has an IQ of only 50” or “this loonie attacker has a mental illness” then those are no longer just opinions. They now contain obvious claims of fact, which of course can be true or false.
I suggest that a valid opinion can make claims over matters of fact where those matters could go either way - in other words the facts are a matter of genuine debate.
“Planes are too heavy to fly” or “the earth is flat” are still opinions - they’re just really stupid opinions, because you can see that planes fly and that the earth isn’t flat. This is about the point where ‘opinion’ intersects with other things like ‘brainfart’ or ‘superstition’.
“The attacker has a mental illness” is a claim regarding fact and it could be proven true or false, but it’s a valid opinion because it hasn’t yet been proven one way or the other, and you could make a case in either direction given (extremely limited) information.
What is the difference between a thought and opinion, l wonder. Can a thought be wrong? What is the consequence of an opinion being wrong, anyway?
“Your opinion is wrong!”
“So?”
“You shut up or else!”
In my opinion this entire thread is a troll and deserves the flame. What hoser started this thread, anyways?
Opinions are like assholes …
That’s an interesting angle I didn’t consider. I just assumed it was the product of some real stubbornness.
Interesting opinion. Might be wrong though.
I’ve selected the best post in this thread as the solution to the question in the title. Close it.
That’s just like, your opinion man.