Depending on how far back you want to go, there have been a number of authors, fanzine proprietors, and conservatives ‘dis-invited’ from a number of different conventions, speaking engagements, etc.
In the last year or so, it was Orson Scott Card. A month or so ago, it was John Ringo. Yesterday it was Larry Correia. Who will it be next month? Sarah Hoyt? Michael Z. Williamson? S. M. Sterling? You? Me? Well, not me, I’m so far down the author food chain I’ll be dead before they ever get that far down…
Libel- It is a viable option. Here is the definition from Black’s Law Dictionary.
Defamation of character is an offense for which a complainant may be eligible to bring another party to civil court. There are two types of defamation: spoken defamation, or slander, and written defamation, or libel.
The balance that makes defamation law tricky is that the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution gives people the right of free speech. On the other hand, people should not be able to ruin the lives of others by disseminating lies to force a business to shut down or compel the breakdown of a family.
Laws regarding defamation vary from state to state, but generally speaking, four criteria must be met for a slander or libel suit to stand a chance of success. The defamation, whether written or spoken, must be:
- Demonstrably and objectively false
- Seen or heard by a public third party
- Quantifiably injurious
- Unprivileged by law
Defamation Must Be Objectively False
It is not against the law to say mean things about somebody if they are either true or if they are entirely subjective. For instance, if a restaurant critic says that the food “was the worst I’ve had in a long time,” the statement, while mean, is vague and subjective enough to avoid a lawsuit. Similarly, environmental activists who make the public aware of corporate practices that harm the earth can’t be sued for defamation as long as they report on the facts.
Defamation Must Be Published
In order to prove injury, you have to prove that other people saw it, heard it, read it and had their minds changed because of the slanderous or libelous statements. Courts generally consider libel to be more serious than slander because writing lasts longer, though major television broadcasts often carry the same weight as major print or web publications because more people viewed them.
Defamation Must Cause Financial Injury
In order to determine the damages from a slander or libel suit, there must be quantifiable damages. Defamation of character damages a person’s or company’s reputation, and it must be proven that the damage to reputation correlated with a loss of money, property, relationship or was subject to harassment that led to any of the above losses.
Defamation Must Not Be Protected Speech
Examples of speech that is privileged and protected specifically by the U.S. Constitution from defamation laws include witness testimony in court and lawmaker statements in legislative chambers or official materials.
As long as the defamatory statements are published, false, injurious and unprivileged, you may have a case to file a defamation lawsuit. Of course, it is always advised to consult with a lawyer before taking any steps forward in your legal action.
It’s becoming readily apparent that it is time to take the gloves off and go after the SJW POS that are pulling this crap. The ‘story’ that got Ringo disinvited was patently false, slanderous, and it did cost him money in lost sales at the minimum. The total lost of sales is TBD, but meets the above qualifications. It was refuted by a knowledgeable source, and yet nothing was done.
The same happened to Correia, and it’s the same BS, bringing up unfounded issues/lies from Sad Puppies, etc. that were freely shared on Vile 770 and other SJW sites. Again no verification, and had been proven false more than once over the last three years. Since Larry was going to promote a new game, and books, again financial loss, TBD but also meets the qualifications.
It’s time to bring in the lawyers, go after these people and make them PAY for their attempts at banning and costing any conservatives or other authors that disagree with them their livelihood. I can’t help but wonder if there is also liability for breach of contract in both these cases??? Especially since Origins apparently violated their own rules.
Stephen Michael Sterling put this up as part of a post yesterday obliquely commenting on the situation-
Humans are tribal; this is inherent, there’s nothing you can do about it.
We’re all going to pick sides, whoop up our side, see its faults as forgivable and the other team’s as evidence of their inherent rottenness, engage in confirmation bias and motivated reasoning and bask in the warm comforting rage of righteousness.
Nobody is objective, and the smarter and better-informed you are the less objective you will be — you’ll just have more cunning rationalizations.
It’s time to take the gloves off and bring them into the court of law, which WILL get their attention, unlike anything else we can do at this point. Our livelihoods could depend on our taking action.
I’m not a lawyer, don’t play one on TV, but I know how to read…