site Search:


 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery






how-to block ads


 
Search Topic:
Share Topic
Post a:
Post a:
AuthorAll Replies


major marco
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA

reply to N3OGH

Re: CEOs need better security

said by N3OGH:

A CEO, while a well known individual is not a public figure, but a private citizen.
That's not for you to decide but a court of law. You may want to refresh your knowledge of what the legal definition of a public figure is before you go spouting off about who is and is not, counselor.

PUBLIC FIGURE - A term usually used in the context of libel and defamation actions where the standards of proof are higher if the party claiming defamation is a public figure and therefore has to prove defamatory statements were made with actual malice. Harte-Hanks Communications v. Connaughton (1989) 491 U.S. 657, 666-668.

The "public figure" issue is not cut and dried. To begin with, a fairly high threshold of public activity is necessary to elevate a person to public figure status, Brown v. Kelly Broadcasting Co. (1989) 48 Cal.3d 711, 745, and, as to those who are not pervasively involved in public affairs, they must have "thrust themselves to the forefront of particular public controversies in order to influence the resolution of the issues involved" to be considered a "limited purpose" public figure. Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. (1974) 418 U.S. 323, 345.

A "particularized determination" is required to decide whether a person is a limited purpose public figure, Bruno & Stillman, Inc. v. Globe Newspaper Co. (1st Cir. 1980) 633 F.2d 583, 589, a standard ensuring that reasonable minds may differ on this subject.

Advertisements themselves are not usually sufficient to transform someone into a public figure. Vegod Corp. v. American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. (1979) 25 Cal.3d 763, 770 [a person in the business world advertising his wares does not necessarily become part of an existing public controversy]; Rancho La Costa, Inc. v. Superior Court (1980) 106 Cal.App.3d 646, 661 [advertising is not thrusting oneself into the vortex of a controversy].

--
The Toll

Tracking Lord Stanley


N3OGH
Yo Soy Col. "Bat" Guano
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1

"That's not for you to decide but a court of law."

Precisely why my original post states this moron deserves a summons and a COURT DATE.

The fact that this is not a libel case (a civil matter) but a harassment case (a criminal matter) means there is a different standard.

Hey, you can be against everything that is corporate America MANNNNNN you can operate under the notion that greedy CEO's are evil MANNNNNNNN. But for Christ sake, how about NOT endorsing the idea of harassing people in their private homes?

Oh, BTW I'm not a lawyer, so please don't call me counselor....
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power…


cyclone_z

join:2006-06-19
Ames, IA

Lighten up, Francis!



N3OGH
Yo Soy Col. "Bat" Guano
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1

said by cyclone_z:

Lighten up, Francis!
Ya know, I often tell people that.

Thanks, I will take it to heart
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power…

Saturday, 02-Jun 19:25:59 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.
Most commented news this week
Hot Topics