John Baglow - They Dare call it treason

Documenting free speech attacks by Richard Warman, Warren Kinsella, the Human Rights Commissions and others who would seek to silence conservative discourse in Canada.

Re: John Baglow - They Dare call it treason

Postby BlawBlaw » 06/ 17/ 12 3:29 am

Blaze Pascal wrote:Hi BlawBlaw, can you shed some light on why Peter's remarks were so objectionable, when we hear far greater slanders every day in the media? What did he say that was so egregious? It looks like a pretty normal left-right slam to me. Why is everyone treating these two little lines so seriously?


The basic rule is that it becomes a big deal if one side is willing to pursue it in court. I haven't read the Appeal Court ruling but it seems that they weren't going to handwave it simply because it was the internet; they want a full trial including expert evidence before it's going to be treated differently than duelling op-ed pieces in a pair of newspapers.

However, if he is successful then you will see many of those "far greater slanders" finding their way into court, generally with lefties as the defendants. The next time some socialist opens their big yap to call a conservative a nazi (neo or otherwise), BLAM!
User avatar
BlawBlaw
 
Posts: 9907
Joined: 01/ 30/ 06 3:15 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: John Baglow - They Dare call it treason

Postby pirapoi » 06/ 17/ 12 12:41 pm

BlawBlaw wrote:
pirapoi wrote:If you must notify within 6 weeks, and begin the lawsuit within 3 months, I'm not sure how the 2 years fits in.


The two years doesn't apply. Section 19 of the Limitations Act says 2 years applies unless a different period is in an Act listed in a schedule; the schedule specifically mentions section 6 of the Libel and Slander Act which sets the limitation period at three months but you get to go back a full year for any additional defamations you can dig up against the same newspaper or broadcasting station.

Section 5 of the Libel and Slander Act lays out the 6 week notice period.


BlawBlaw, - thank you for your answer.
Now to prove the old adage 'no good deed goes unpunished' here are a couple more points I'm unsure about.

1. the schedule specifically mentions section 6 of the Libel and Slander Act which sets the limitation period at three months but you get to go back a full year for any additional defamations you can dig up against the same newspaper or broadcasting station.


So you could back a year ONLY IF you had a defamation within the past 3 months?

2. you get to go back a full year for any additional defamations you can dig up against the same newspaper or broadcasting station


Is the internet considered a broadcast station?

From what I've been able to find on Ontario defamation law this seems to be for the most part uncharted water.
User avatar
pirapoi
 
Posts: 1216
Joined: 04/ 08/ 04 1:42 pm
Location: Western Canada

Previous

Return to Censorship Files - The Blogosphere under attack

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests