Apparently someone trademarked Burger King in Australia before the big fast food company got here. They tried to sell it to Burger King for an enormous profit but the price they asked was too high and Burger King simply decided to come up with a different name - Hungry Jacks. At least, that's the urban legend I grew up hearing.
Clearly now that situation has expired, because now we have both Burger King and Hungry Jacks stores in Australia.
The onus of proof in rape and molestation cases is very high but I feel a completely separate issue from slander.
If you are molested and then accuse your abuser and their business drops off from the rumours, it is in no way the same as being validated in a court of law and having that perpetrator convicted of that crime. It's not okay that it's extremely easy to get away with abuse but slander is not justice for the victims.
Are you telling me something bad happens to *everyone* who's accused of molestation?
I think it's pretty tough on most people who are falsely accused. I guess there might be some people who take it in their stride and possibly many people who suffer no ill financial repercussions. However there would be many who would and I feel they should be protected by law.
It is extremely easy to make an untrue statement that will have tangible financial (and other) consequences for innocent parties.
I doubt that if libel laws were removed that the level of libel would remain at its present level. With no consquences I honestly believe many people would attempt to discredit innocent parties maliciously. And these maligned parties would have little recourse and often imbalanced resources with which to address the accusations.
If one person's saying it and it's that extreme, it's probably disbelieved anyway.
Are you serious?
So if I hate my high school maths teacher and say he sexually abuses children and all he can do is deny it, you don't think that would create doubt in people's minds, make people treat him differently and possibly get him fired?
There are good reasons for libel laws. Free speech should have limits.
Slashdot Mirror
Apparently someone trademarked Burger King in Australia before the big fast food company got here. They tried to sell it to Burger King for an enormous profit but the price they asked was too high and Burger King simply decided to come up with a different name - Hungry Jacks. At least, that's the urban legend I grew up hearing.
Clearly now that situation has expired, because now we have both Burger King and Hungry Jacks stores in Australia.
The onus of proof in rape and molestation cases is very high but I feel a completely separate issue from slander.
If you are molested and then accuse your abuser and their business drops off from the rumours, it is in no way the same as being validated in a court of law and having that perpetrator convicted of that crime. It's not okay that it's extremely easy to get away with abuse but slander is not justice for the victims.
Are you telling me something bad happens to *everyone* who's accused of molestation?
I think it's pretty tough on most people who are falsely accused. I guess there might be some people who take it in their stride and possibly many people who suffer no ill financial repercussions. However there would be many who would and I feel they should be protected by law.
It is extremely easy to make an untrue statement that will have tangible financial (and other) consequences for innocent parties.
I doubt that if libel laws were removed that the level of libel would remain at its present level. With no consquences I honestly believe many people would attempt to discredit innocent parties maliciously. And these maligned parties would have little recourse and often imbalanced resources with which to address the accusations.
If one person's saying it and it's that extreme, it's probably disbelieved anyway.
Are you serious?
So if I hate my high school maths teacher and say he sexually abuses children and all he can do is deny it, you don't think that would create doubt in people's minds, make people treat him differently and possibly get him fired?
There are good reasons for libel laws. Free speech should have limits.