Actually if the truth be known, slander is the spoken word and the person who thinks he is being slandered actually has to prove damages.
Libel, however, is the written word; usually written in a public forum such as PPRUNE. In this case, damages are assumed to have been incurred by the plaintiff unless the defendant can prove what he wrote was the truth.
Here it is from a lawyer:
Libel is written defamation and slander is oral defamation. In an action for libel one does not have to prove damages. They are presumed. In other words, the law presumes that some damage will flow from the publication of a libel. The law also presumes in the plaintiff's favor that the statement in question is false, unless and until the defendant proves the contrary.
On the other hand, in slander, with the exception of four situations, one has to prove actual loss. The law does not presume that the publication caused the plaintiff any damage. The plaintiff has to prove special damage except in the following four situations:
1. The words charged that the plaintiff committed a criminal offense.
2. The words impute that the plaintiff has certain contagious diseases.
3. The words impute unchastity or adultery to any woman or girl.
4. The words are calculated disparage the plaintiff in any office profession, trade, calling or business held or carried on by him at the time of the publication.
So for instance, a public assertion that Bourne is "in bed" with Cato and a public declaration that Bourne is somehow colluding with the company "could" be taken to court as a libel. On the other hand it also seems to meet the parameters of item #4 above if it was spoken.
I guess that is one of the differences I see in this whole argument. The Polar guys tend to personalize it, name calling (you should see the PM's I get from Mr. Rilly) and accusing people of things that they THINK happened. Where the Atlas guys seem to focus on the issues and trying to get at the truth.
The fact that the rhetoric has heated up lately indicates the level of frustration on both sides - but some, in their infinite wisdom; and rob, in his childlike tantrums, decided to continue to post name calling, libelous statements, and innuendo instead of fairly discussing the issues.
Sorry but this is so typical. One of the staffers at a shared hotel in the Atlas system said it best - "You Atlas guys, you gentlemen - some of the Polar guys: not so much."
Last edited by WhaleFR8; 8th Jun 2008 at 20:32.