BehindBlueI's
Grandmaster
- Oct 3, 2012
- 25,977
- 113
I’m afraid I went over your head.
Wanna fight about it?
I’m afraid I went over your head.
If it's obviously and identifiably not a true image, I agree. If it purports to be true, I disagree and so does the law as I read it:
Yes, Indiana code includes "whoredom" as a word...
I assume we can all agree there's a value judgement assigned to engaging in sex acts or posing nude for public consumption in our society? I assume we can all agree that value is not compatible with the *very lucrative* brand TS has?
Is it really defamation? What injury has it caused TS?If someone is using TS’s face to portray her in porn, and is asserting that it’s really her, that’s defamation.
Had my former pastor tell me he would die to protect my 1A rights, but didn’t care if they got rid of the 2A. Sad when people don’t know history.Without the 2nd, 1A doesn't stand a chance
It's very strange that people can see one without the other to me they go together. I imagine that's why they are literally 1 and 2Had my former pastor tell me he would die to protect my 1A rights, but didn’t care if they got rid of the 2A. Sad when people don’t know history.
Are you serious? The porn images of TS showing up on social media isn’t defamation. They’re fake. Whoever published them isn’t asserting they’re real as far as I know. The hypothetical example I gave was that publisher asserted they’re real. The harm is to her reputation/image, which she monetizes.Is it really defamation? What injury has it caused TS?
Defamation varies in their standards for defamation and potential damages. Defamation is a tricky area of law as the lines between stating an opinion versus a fact can be vague, and defamation tests the limits of the first amendment freedoms of speech and press.Are you serious? The porn images of TS showing up on social media isn’t defamation. They’re fake. Whoever published them isn’t asserting they’re real as far as I know. The hypothetical example I gave was that publisher asserted they’re real. The harm is to her reputation/image, which she monetizes.
I read the same thing you did. All 4 elements would be there in the scenario I suggested. All I know of what happened, was that recently someone published deep fake porn of TS on X. That doesn't rise to the level of defamation. In the hypothetical I gave, it would, because someone would be asserting, falsely, that she's in a porno. That would be damaging to her reputation, which she monetizes.Defamation varies in their standards for defamation and potential damages. Defamation is a tricky area of law as the lines between stating an opinion versus a fact can be vague, and defamation tests the limits of the first amendment freedoms of speech and press.
Elements
To prove prima facie defamation, a plaintiff must show four things: 1) a false statement purporting to be fact; 2) publication or communication of that statement to a third person; 3) fault amounting to at least negligence; and 4) damages, or some harm caused to the reputation of the person or entity who is the subject of the statement.
That is according to Cornell Law School, look it up. While I agree that it would seem like TS porn would be defamation, you need to prove injury, harm or damages. TS is a big enough star that I believe it may be difficult to prove damages or harm.
Why is it even an issue of right or left? It's an issue whether the scenario defamation or not. As it pertains to this thread, is it free speech or not? My view is that whoever created/posted the fake TS porn on X didn't defame anyone. There's no harm because people understand it's fake. If anyone was harmed over it, it's X, because the Swifties are gonja pissed that X let it happen. But everyone knows those weren't really her ****, that really wasn't her ass. She wasn't performing porn as would be asserted in the defamation scenario.While I may agree with you, I am not sure if the far left legals would not fight it and possibly win.
AgreedWhy is it even an issue of right or left? It's an issue whether the scenario defamation or not. As it pertains to this thread, is it free speech or not? My view is that whoever created/posted the fake TS porn on X didn't defame anyone. There's no harm because people understand it's fake. If anyone was harmed over it, it's X, because the Swifties are gonja pissed that X let it happen. But everyone knows those weren't really her ****, that really wasn't her ass. She wasn't performing porn as would be asserted in the defamation scenario.