Slashdot Mirror
Negative Online Reviews Are Not Defamation (At Least In Canada)
An anonymous reader writes A client who was dissatisfied with the service of an immigration company in Canada took her grievances online, upon which she was sued for defamation and libel by the owner of the company. A Canadian superior court has tossed out the lawsuit with the note: "One may be dissatisfied with the quality or efficiency of services but expressing one's dissatisfaction is not equivalent to defamation." The court noted: "This demand is grossly exaggerated. It flirts with frivolity and abuse within the meaning given to these words in Article 54.1 C.C.P."
It's to be noted that defamation law is different in Canada than in the US. In Canada, the truth of a statement is not, in and of itself, sufficient to have a claim of defamation dismissed. The effect of the statement and the intent also come into play. For example, someone may be gay or lesbian or whatever, but that does not give you the right to say so with the intent for them to, for example, lose their job.
And in the end, Streisand Effect! strikes again.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
"Facts aren't defamation."
They are in the UK where truth is not an absolute defense of libel.
Need Mercedes parts ?