Ok, so let's talk about what libel actually is vs everyone's preconceived notions here. Â This will be important to remember for future discussions.
Libel is the act of damaging the reputation of another person in text through public speech, and it is illegal. Â Severe civil penalties can be accrued by libelous speech, and it is generally considered a big bad nono in professional journalism circles. Â But what exactly qualifies as libelous speech?
For one thing, it has to be untrue. Â If the person committing libel is backing up what they're saying with screenshots, then it's not libel, or slander. Â It's simply speech. Â This does not mean that their interpretation has to be correct. Â If their base facts are correct, and they can prove that "X said Y" then it's not libel, and there is no legal recourse or right for complaint according to US law.
If you are a private person instead of a public figure (more on that later), then you need to prove negligence on the part of the libeler.  This means that you have to prove that they did not do the amount of research that a reasonable person would do in order to prove their statement. Â
If xx420blazinxx heard that Buff van Darkblade was harassing female players from EkwilRites69, then posts that statement on his tumblr immediately, then our friend 420 is guilty of negligence because he didn't ask which players were being harassed nor did he ask the supposed victims.
Had xx420blazinxx asked the all the victims, and they corroborated each others' stories, but had no screenshots,victims, it becomes a bit confusing, but 420 can probably get away with it because he did the amount of research a reasonable person would do.
Now if you're a public figure things are much harder for you. Â This covers politicians, celebrities and business leaders, which in an MMO setting could include FC Leaders or other people who make it a point of being seen and well known about the community. Â If you're a public figure then you have to prove actual malice. Â It's no longer just about action, it's about intent.
Let's say Buff van Darkblade is now the head of his own super popular FC, The Orange Wings, with over 50 active members, and ol' xx420blazinxx  puts up on his tumblr that Buff consistently tries to sexually harass his female members and send them dick pics.  Now, 420 has no proof of this, but EkwilRites69 told him it was true, and 420 is just trying to warn girls and keep them safe.  In this situation 420 has the same amount of info he had last time, but he's completely in the right, legally speaking.
Buff needs to prove that 420 is blatantly disregarding the facts, not just misinterpreting them, not just parroting things he heard from a reasonable source, and he has to prove that this blatant disregard for the facts is specifically meant to damage his reputation, not to protect people.
As you can see, being famous has its drawbacks, which is why the National Enquirer can get away with its headlines.
Generally speaking though, there is a reason to say bad things about people and call them out. Â When the truth about events is obfuscated by allusion and vague references then misinterpretation is extremely easy. Â It can, in fact, lead to libel. Â If you're going to call someone out for something, take screenshots, post proof and use evidence to back up your claims.
Without call outs bad people continue to do bad things, but rumor mongering is bad, everyone can agree. Â Instead gather evidence, post screenshots and leave no room for doubt as to the veracity of your claims.
Don't post rants on the RPC that name no names, but which "people in the know" will get. Â It's irresponsible, rude and inappropriate.
Libel is the act of damaging the reputation of another person in text through public speech, and it is illegal. Â Severe civil penalties can be accrued by libelous speech, and it is generally considered a big bad nono in professional journalism circles. Â But what exactly qualifies as libelous speech?
For one thing, it has to be untrue. Â If the person committing libel is backing up what they're saying with screenshots, then it's not libel, or slander. Â It's simply speech. Â This does not mean that their interpretation has to be correct. Â If their base facts are correct, and they can prove that "X said Y" then it's not libel, and there is no legal recourse or right for complaint according to US law.
If you are a private person instead of a public figure (more on that later), then you need to prove negligence on the part of the libeler.  This means that you have to prove that they did not do the amount of research that a reasonable person would do in order to prove their statement. Â
If xx420blazinxx heard that Buff van Darkblade was harassing female players from EkwilRites69, then posts that statement on his tumblr immediately, then our friend 420 is guilty of negligence because he didn't ask which players were being harassed nor did he ask the supposed victims.
Had xx420blazinxx asked the all the victims, and they corroborated each others' stories, but had no screenshots,victims, it becomes a bit confusing, but 420 can probably get away with it because he did the amount of research a reasonable person would do.
Now if you're a public figure things are much harder for you. Â This covers politicians, celebrities and business leaders, which in an MMO setting could include FC Leaders or other people who make it a point of being seen and well known about the community. Â If you're a public figure then you have to prove actual malice. Â It's no longer just about action, it's about intent.
Let's say Buff van Darkblade is now the head of his own super popular FC, The Orange Wings, with over 50 active members, and ol' xx420blazinxx  puts up on his tumblr that Buff consistently tries to sexually harass his female members and send them dick pics.  Now, 420 has no proof of this, but EkwilRites69 told him it was true, and 420 is just trying to warn girls and keep them safe.  In this situation 420 has the same amount of info he had last time, but he's completely in the right, legally speaking.
Buff needs to prove that 420 is blatantly disregarding the facts, not just misinterpreting them, not just parroting things he heard from a reasonable source, and he has to prove that this blatant disregard for the facts is specifically meant to damage his reputation, not to protect people.
As you can see, being famous has its drawbacks, which is why the National Enquirer can get away with its headlines.
Generally speaking though, there is a reason to say bad things about people and call them out. Â When the truth about events is obfuscated by allusion and vague references then misinterpretation is extremely easy. Â It can, in fact, lead to libel. Â If you're going to call someone out for something, take screenshots, post proof and use evidence to back up your claims.
Without call outs bad people continue to do bad things, but rumor mongering is bad, everyone can agree. Â Instead gather evidence, post screenshots and leave no room for doubt as to the veracity of your claims.
Don't post rants on the RPC that name no names, but which "people in the know" will get. Â It's irresponsible, rude and inappropriate.
