defamation$19473$ - definizione. Che cos'è defamation$19473$
Diclib.com
Dizionario ChatGPT
Inserisci una parola o una frase in qualsiasi lingua 👆
Lingua:

Traduzione e analisi delle parole tramite l'intelligenza artificiale ChatGPT

In questa pagina puoi ottenere un'analisi dettagliata di una parola o frase, prodotta utilizzando la migliore tecnologia di intelligenza artificiale fino ad oggi:

  • come viene usata la parola
  • frequenza di utilizzo
  • è usato più spesso nel discorso orale o scritto
  • opzioni di traduzione delle parole
  • esempi di utilizzo (varie frasi con traduzione)
  • etimologia

Cosa (chi) è defamation$19473$ - definizione

DEFAMATION LITIGATION CHOSEN BASED ON FAVORABLE JURISDICTION
Defamation shopping

Defamation of religion and the United Nations         
TOPIC OF UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTIONS
Defamation of religion; Defamation of Religion; Blasphemy and the United Nations; Defamation of religions and the United Nations; Anti-blasphemy resolution; Defamation of Religions
Defamation of religion is an issue that was repeatedly addressed by some member states of the United Nations (UN) from 1999 until 2010. Several non-binding resolutions were voted on and accepted by the UN condemning "defamation of religion".
calumny         
  • Prince of Sagan]]'s assault on Barboux.
CRIME OR TORT OF HARMING THE REPUTATION OF A LEGAL PERSON THROUGH FALSE OR MISLEADING STATEMENT
Libel and slander; Slander; Calumny; Defamation of character; Defame; Slanderous; Defamatory; Absolute privilege; Libel; Defaming; Libel per se; Trade libel; Conspiracy to libel; Political libel; Libelous; Slander and libel; Libeler; Libeller; German defamation law; Defamation law in the United Kingdom; Defames; Defamed; Slanders; Slandered; Slandering; Libels; Vilification; Vilify; Defamations; Libellous; Slanderer; Slanderers; Slander & libel; Besmirch; Calumniator; Calumniators; Defamation per se; Libel law; Defamation law in Scotland; Famacide; Famosus libelus; Famosus; Traducement; Libel suit; Character defamation; Libel per Quod; Criminal defamation; Anti-defamation; Rex v. Orme and Nutt (1700); King v. Osborne (1732); Defamation lawsuit; Group defamation; Defamation laws; Calumnies; Traduce; Chinese defamation law; Indian defamation law; Defamation in Scots law; Veritas (Scots law); Defamation in Scotland; Libel laws; Libel lawsuit
n. to heap calumny on
libel         
  • Prince of Sagan]]'s assault on Barboux.
CRIME OR TORT OF HARMING THE REPUTATION OF A LEGAL PERSON THROUGH FALSE OR MISLEADING STATEMENT
Libel and slander; Slander; Calumny; Defamation of character; Defame; Slanderous; Defamatory; Absolute privilege; Libel; Defaming; Libel per se; Trade libel; Conspiracy to libel; Political libel; Libelous; Slander and libel; Libeler; Libeller; German defamation law; Defamation law in the United Kingdom; Defames; Defamed; Slanders; Slandered; Slandering; Libels; Vilification; Vilify; Defamations; Libellous; Slanderer; Slanderers; Slander & libel; Besmirch; Calumniator; Calumniators; Defamation per se; Libel law; Defamation law in Scotland; Famacide; Famosus libelus; Famosus; Traducement; Libel suit; Character defamation; Libel per Quod; Criminal defamation; Anti-defamation; Rex v. Orme and Nutt (1700); King v. Osborne (1732); Defamation lawsuit; Group defamation; Defamation laws; Calumnies; Traduce; Chinese defamation law; Indian defamation law; Defamation in Scots law; Veritas (Scots law); Defamation in Scotland; Libel laws; Libel lawsuit
1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others. Libel is the written or broadcast form of defamation, distinguished from slander, which is oral defamation. It is a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity (like a newspaper, magazine or political organization) open to a lawsuit for damages by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie. Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact and is not clearly identified as an opinion. While it is sometimes said that the person making the libelous statement must have been intentional and malicious, actually it need only be obvious that the statement would do harm and is untrue. Proof of malice, however, does allow a party defamed to sue for general damages for damage to reputation, while an inadvertent libel limits the damages to actual harm (such as loss of business) called special damages. Libel per se involves statements so vicious that malice is assumed and does not require a proof of intent to get an award of general damages. Libel against the reputation of a person who has died will allow surviving members of the family to bring an action for damages. Most states provide for a party defamed by a periodical to demand a published retraction. If the correction is made, then there is no right to file a lawsuit. Governmental bodies are supposedly immune to actions for libel on the basis that there could be no intent by a non-personal entity, and further, public records are exempt from claims of libel. However, there is at least one known case in which there was a financial settlement as well as a published correction when a state government newsletter incorrectly stated that a dentist had been disciplined for illegal conduct. The rules covering libel against a "public figure" (particularly a political or governmental person) are special, based on U.S. Supreme Court decisions. The key is that to uphold the right to express opinions or fair comment on public figures, the libel must be malicious to constitute grounds for a lawsuit for damages. Minor errors in reporting are not libel, such as saying Mrs. Jones was 55 when she was only 48, or getting an address or title incorrect. 2) v. to broadcast or publish a written defamatory statement. See also: defamation libel per se public figure slander

Wikipedia

Libel tourism

Libel tourism is a term, first coined by Geoffrey Robertson, to describe forum shopping for libel suits. It particularly refers to the practice of pursuing a case in England and Wales, in preference to other jurisdictions, such as the United States, which provide more extensive defenses for those accused of making derogatory statements.

A critic of English defamation law, journalist Geoffrey Wheatcroft attributes the practice to the introduction of no win no fee agreements, the presumption that derogatory statements are false, the difficulty of establishing fair comment and "the caprice of juries and the malice of judges." Wheatcroft contrasts this with United States law since the New York Times Co. v. Sullivan case. "Any American public figure bringing an action now has to prove that what was written was not only untrue but published maliciously and recklessly."

Two other critics of English defamation law, the US lawyers Samuel A. Abady and Harvey Silverglate, have cited the example of Irish–Saudi businessman Khalid bin Mahfouz, who by the time of his death in 2009, had threatened suit more than 40 times in England against those who accused him of funding terrorism. Mahfouz also took legal action in Belgium, France and Switzerland against those repeating the accusations. George W. Bush advisor Richard Perle threatened to sue investigative reporter Seymour Hersh in London, because of a series of critical articles Hersh had written about him.

A series of cases involving US citizens being sued in English courts led to new laws in both countries. In the United States, the SPEECH Act unanimously passed the US Congress, which makes foreign defamation judgments unenforceable in US courts if they do not meet US free speech standards. In England and Wales, the Defamation Act 2013 requires plaintiffs to show that England is the proper jurisdiction to hear a case when the defendant does not live in England or Wales.