Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Deset Gled" data-source="post: 8787617" data-attributes="member: 7808">Probably not. (IANAL)In order to win a libel case, you have to prove publication, identification, harm, and fault (and sometimes malice).Publication means you have to prove it was published.  It's trivial in this case; it's all over the internet.  Links are included in the filing.Identification means you have to show that you are the person being libeled.  This is mostly trivial.  There is a little bit of gray area to be played with here.  The first is that some of the things the lawsuit references are Tenkar's reaction to the various Mario twitter accounts, and it's unclear who those are.  The second weird thing is that Lanasa is including NuTSR and the DHSM along with himself.  I don't know enough about the law to understand the intricacies of how this works.  But I'm guessing that because Lanasa is sole owner of both LLCs, it won't make a difference.Harm means you have to prove that actual damage was done.  IMNHO, this is a major problem for Lanasa.  He makes vague claims of emotional distress, but he'll need to do more.  Most of the time, you need to show actual money was lost.  This could be proof that sales were lost, or that you had to spend money fixing things.  This is where the Geek Nation Tour thing is important; Lanasa claimed earlier in his C&D that he could prove he lost money by not getting the tour.  But it's not listed in the lawsuit.  He also really can't claim lost revenue from NuTSR, because they have no real product.  If he's serious about the therapy claim, he'll have to show how much was spent on it for the claim to be substantiated.Fault means you have to prove the libel is, well, lying.  This is another major problem for Lanasa.  Opinions are covered as free speech.  If Tenkar has reason to believe the things he said, it's not lying.  I'd have to go line by line through the links in the lawsuit, but at a quick glance I can't find any place where Tenkar was openly or blatantly lying about anything.  There may be a hyperbole or ad hominem attacks, but that's well below the bar that Lanasa needs to prove.Lastly, if Lanasa is considered a "public figure", he also has to prove malice.  That means that even if Tenkar was lying, Lanasa would have to prove Tenkar lied for the express purpose of causing harm.  If I were Tenkar, one defense I would be making is that Lanasa is a public figure (both from his history as a politician, and his public actions on the internet).  It would signficantly raise the bar of what Lanasa needs to prove.I don't think Lanasa has enough proof about damages or actual lies to make anything stick.  I also have a strong feeling that this is a <a href="https://anti-slapp.org/what-is-a-slapp" target="_blank">SLAPP</a>. And if Tenkar can prove that, he can file an <a href="https://www.arnoldporter.com/en/perspectives/advisories/2020/11/new-yorks-new-anti-slapp-law" target="_blank">anti-SLAPP</a> suit in retaliation.</blockquote>

Verification